![]() | This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Double sharp,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Complex/
Rational
03:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Complex/ Rational 03:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
now lower case like the other gallileans, but based on the old IPA script iota that looks like a squashed reversed esh. Took the curve from Grus. (A typical Greek-font iota didn't work well.) — kwami ( talk) 23:36, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Periodic table, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Otto Berg.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
You may remember that aluminum production requires a lot of energy and that has been in short supply in Europe for the past couple of years. This has had a devastating effect on aluminum production in Europe.
Do you think that is something that merits inclusion in the aluminium article? I want to keep the article up to date, but I also don't want to overemphasize recent developments if they don't merit inclusion. I'd like a second opinion from you on that since you both contributed to the article significantly and are quite removed from the sorry developments in Europe.
Please don't feel obliged to rush an answer. I'd like to get back to it one day and go through FAC, but that is not coming for a few months perhaps. R8R ( talk) 13:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Heads up, 1 new moon of Uranus and 2 new moons of Neptune were just announced by the MPC about an hour ago! There's supposed to be 5 new moons of Uranus, but since it's very late for the MPC, I suspect they'll announce the remaining 4 later. Here's the link to the new announcements. Nrco0e ( talk) 08:45, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
@ Exoplanetaryscience: Pinging you so you can update your graphics. :) Double sharp ( talk) 08:51, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
@ Nrco0e: I notice that articles announcing the discoveries have already started coming out, with just 1 new Uranian moon (and of course the 2 new Neptunians); are the other Uranians then not yet ready? Double sharp ( talk) 08:47, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
@ Exoplanetaryscience: Just a heads up that the scales and units are missing from the Uranus diagram in the latest update. :) Double sharp ( talk) 17:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
I was planning to share this with you and @ Kwamikagami: a few weeks ago, but I was busy then. Anyways, a new paper on Quaoar was posted to arXiv a while ago and was recently accepted for publication (forthcoming) in the Astronomy & Astrophysics journal. The paper analyzes visible-light and far-infrared thermal lightcurves of Quaoar and claims that it is an non-equilibrium ellipsoid with a volume-equivalent diameter of 1090±40 km and axial ratios of a/b = 1.19 and b/c = 1.16, which corresponds to dimensions 1286 x 1080 x 932 km. According to the authors, "We suggest that Quaoar may have originally been rotating fast enough to have obtained a triaxial shape (similar to Haumea), and that the shape was ‘frozen in’." Nrco0e ( talk) 17:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Draft:C-Infinity, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Equine-man ( talk) 21:10, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
I've re-added your addition. Warmest thanks. Tim riley talk 14:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
I've long noticed that the 7− → 6+ transition of 176Lu with Q value 593.33 keV seems irregular to have such long half-life, as there are β decays with ΔJΔπ = 1− whose half-life is short, like 113mCd → 113In (11/2− → 9/2+, 583.88 keV) and 170Tm → 170Er (1− → 0+, 313.99 keV).
In Talk:Isotopes of lutetium you wrote: "The second is that, while 176Hf has low-energy excited states with spins 6+ and 8+ that 176Lu could decay to (these are only first-forbidden), the spin of 176Lu is intrinsic while those of these excited states of 176Hf are due to collective nuclear rotation, which results in a terrible match." I was wondering if you could kindly give some more detailed information. In particular, isn't the decay 113mCd → 113In from collective nuclear rotation to being intrinsic?
Also, would you expect the decay process 212mAt → 212Po (9− → 8+, 271.84 keV) to have very long (for example, > 1013 years) half-life? Is the spin of both nuclides due to collective nuclear rotation?
Thanks! 129.104.241.193 ( talk) 02:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 29 June 2024. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/June 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before the article appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!— Wehwalt ( talk) 16:11, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi DS! I don't know if you've read the newest JINR paper (
doi:
10.1103/PhysRevC.109.054307 – I can email you the PDF if you don't already have it), though with the newest data, we have 271Hs as the new winner for most stable isotope: 46+56
−10 s, compared to 13+10
−4 s for the next-most-stable 269Hs. These are significantly different at a 1σ confidence interval, but according to my math, not so at 2σ (95% CI). I'm unsure if this is good enough to eliminate the infobox footnote about the data not being decisive.
I should note that comparable uncertainties exist for other elements as well, and may also be deserving of such a footnote. For instance, according to NUBASE, the 1σ confidence intervals for 97Tc and 98Tc overlap, and the data in the new JINR paper also means that 267Sg and 269Sg also have overlapping 1σ confidence intervals. (And there's also a mess of isomers to sort out now.) Complex/ Rational 17:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
This is just out of curiosity: Are you the original poster here? :)
I do agree that octal is a great system, and personally I like nonary (base 9) equally well. In base 9, or like in any other base where the radix is a square, when calculating modulo a prime p the reptend has at most length p - 1/2. In base 8 it depends: for p ≡ 5, 11 (mod 24) there is great chance that 8 is a primitive root modulo p, but for p ≡ 1, 7 (mod 24) the reptend is reduced at least to one sixth.
Imagine a civilization using base 8 and another using base 9. The amateur math enthusiasts from the first would find the prime numbers 5 and 11 fascinating as full reptend primes just like how the number 7 is important to our cultures. The early number theorists would then realize that the next full reptend primes 29, 53, 59, ... (sequence A019338 in the OEIS) are large and that they all follow the pattern of being congruent to 5 or 11 modulo 24, so there would be a chance to develop the theory of quadratic residue to explain the phenomenon.
In base 9, of course, there are no full reptend primes, but there are enough small prime numbers p such that the multiplicative order of 9 modulo p is p - 1/2, which occurs for p = 5, 7, 11, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, ... (sequence A364867 in the OEIS). For these primes, there are two possible cycles for the reptend of 1/p, 2/p, ..., p - 1/p, one produced by the quadratic residues divided by p and another by the quadratic nonresidues. The civilization could also develop the theory of quadratic residue in early times by observing the pattern of the cycles. This would work also in other square bases but 4 is too small as a base and 16 too big.
Another feature of base 9 is the small Wieferich prime 11 in this base. Of course 3 is a Wieferich prime in base 8 but it would be considered as too trivial, like us that are usually ignoring 3 being a Wieferich prime in decimal in our daily life and have to calculate up to p = 487 to refute that the period length of 1/p2 is p times that of 1/p. Of course 11 is already a Wieferich prime in base 3 but 3 is just too small. 129.104.241.193 ( talk) 02:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Are you able to comment on this nomination(?); there's no obligation. Thanks, Sandbh ( talk) 05:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
This German song is inspired by Erlkoenig, which you mentioned on your user page. It really got me at the end when I first heard this song.-- R8R ( talk) 18:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Template:Charles-Valentin Alkan/doc has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Gonnym (
talk)
09:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | |
story · music · places |
---|
Thank you today for Nihonium, introduced (in 2018): "This article is about is the first element recognised to have been discovered in Asia, and we can hope that there will be more in our march to the end of the periodic table, wherever that happens to be."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:58, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
The redirect
Triambus has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 1 § Triambus until a consensus is reached.
GTrang (
talk)
23:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Double sharp,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Complex/
Rational
03:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Complex/ Rational 03:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
now lower case like the other gallileans, but based on the old IPA script iota that looks like a squashed reversed esh. Took the curve from Grus. (A typical Greek-font iota didn't work well.) — kwami ( talk) 23:36, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Periodic table, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Otto Berg.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
You may remember that aluminum production requires a lot of energy and that has been in short supply in Europe for the past couple of years. This has had a devastating effect on aluminum production in Europe.
Do you think that is something that merits inclusion in the aluminium article? I want to keep the article up to date, but I also don't want to overemphasize recent developments if they don't merit inclusion. I'd like a second opinion from you on that since you both contributed to the article significantly and are quite removed from the sorry developments in Europe.
Please don't feel obliged to rush an answer. I'd like to get back to it one day and go through FAC, but that is not coming for a few months perhaps. R8R ( talk) 13:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Heads up, 1 new moon of Uranus and 2 new moons of Neptune were just announced by the MPC about an hour ago! There's supposed to be 5 new moons of Uranus, but since it's very late for the MPC, I suspect they'll announce the remaining 4 later. Here's the link to the new announcements. Nrco0e ( talk) 08:45, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
@ Exoplanetaryscience: Pinging you so you can update your graphics. :) Double sharp ( talk) 08:51, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
@ Nrco0e: I notice that articles announcing the discoveries have already started coming out, with just 1 new Uranian moon (and of course the 2 new Neptunians); are the other Uranians then not yet ready? Double sharp ( talk) 08:47, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
@ Exoplanetaryscience: Just a heads up that the scales and units are missing from the Uranus diagram in the latest update. :) Double sharp ( talk) 17:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
I was planning to share this with you and @ Kwamikagami: a few weeks ago, but I was busy then. Anyways, a new paper on Quaoar was posted to arXiv a while ago and was recently accepted for publication (forthcoming) in the Astronomy & Astrophysics journal. The paper analyzes visible-light and far-infrared thermal lightcurves of Quaoar and claims that it is an non-equilibrium ellipsoid with a volume-equivalent diameter of 1090±40 km and axial ratios of a/b = 1.19 and b/c = 1.16, which corresponds to dimensions 1286 x 1080 x 932 km. According to the authors, "We suggest that Quaoar may have originally been rotating fast enough to have obtained a triaxial shape (similar to Haumea), and that the shape was ‘frozen in’." Nrco0e ( talk) 17:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Draft:C-Infinity, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Equine-man ( talk) 21:10, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
I've re-added your addition. Warmest thanks. Tim riley talk 14:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
I've long noticed that the 7− → 6+ transition of 176Lu with Q value 593.33 keV seems irregular to have such long half-life, as there are β decays with ΔJΔπ = 1− whose half-life is short, like 113mCd → 113In (11/2− → 9/2+, 583.88 keV) and 170Tm → 170Er (1− → 0+, 313.99 keV).
In Talk:Isotopes of lutetium you wrote: "The second is that, while 176Hf has low-energy excited states with spins 6+ and 8+ that 176Lu could decay to (these are only first-forbidden), the spin of 176Lu is intrinsic while those of these excited states of 176Hf are due to collective nuclear rotation, which results in a terrible match." I was wondering if you could kindly give some more detailed information. In particular, isn't the decay 113mCd → 113In from collective nuclear rotation to being intrinsic?
Also, would you expect the decay process 212mAt → 212Po (9− → 8+, 271.84 keV) to have very long (for example, > 1013 years) half-life? Is the spin of both nuclides due to collective nuclear rotation?
Thanks! 129.104.241.193 ( talk) 02:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 29 June 2024. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/June 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before the article appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!— Wehwalt ( talk) 16:11, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi DS! I don't know if you've read the newest JINR paper (
doi:
10.1103/PhysRevC.109.054307 – I can email you the PDF if you don't already have it), though with the newest data, we have 271Hs as the new winner for most stable isotope: 46+56
−10 s, compared to 13+10
−4 s for the next-most-stable 269Hs. These are significantly different at a 1σ confidence interval, but according to my math, not so at 2σ (95% CI). I'm unsure if this is good enough to eliminate the infobox footnote about the data not being decisive.
I should note that comparable uncertainties exist for other elements as well, and may also be deserving of such a footnote. For instance, according to NUBASE, the 1σ confidence intervals for 97Tc and 98Tc overlap, and the data in the new JINR paper also means that 267Sg and 269Sg also have overlapping 1σ confidence intervals. (And there's also a mess of isomers to sort out now.) Complex/ Rational 17:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
This is just out of curiosity: Are you the original poster here? :)
I do agree that octal is a great system, and personally I like nonary (base 9) equally well. In base 9, or like in any other base where the radix is a square, when calculating modulo a prime p the reptend has at most length p - 1/2. In base 8 it depends: for p ≡ 5, 11 (mod 24) there is great chance that 8 is a primitive root modulo p, but for p ≡ 1, 7 (mod 24) the reptend is reduced at least to one sixth.
Imagine a civilization using base 8 and another using base 9. The amateur math enthusiasts from the first would find the prime numbers 5 and 11 fascinating as full reptend primes just like how the number 7 is important to our cultures. The early number theorists would then realize that the next full reptend primes 29, 53, 59, ... (sequence A019338 in the OEIS) are large and that they all follow the pattern of being congruent to 5 or 11 modulo 24, so there would be a chance to develop the theory of quadratic residue to explain the phenomenon.
In base 9, of course, there are no full reptend primes, but there are enough small prime numbers p such that the multiplicative order of 9 modulo p is p - 1/2, which occurs for p = 5, 7, 11, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, ... (sequence A364867 in the OEIS). For these primes, there are two possible cycles for the reptend of 1/p, 2/p, ..., p - 1/p, one produced by the quadratic residues divided by p and another by the quadratic nonresidues. The civilization could also develop the theory of quadratic residue in early times by observing the pattern of the cycles. This would work also in other square bases but 4 is too small as a base and 16 too big.
Another feature of base 9 is the small Wieferich prime 11 in this base. Of course 3 is a Wieferich prime in base 8 but it would be considered as too trivial, like us that are usually ignoring 3 being a Wieferich prime in decimal in our daily life and have to calculate up to p = 487 to refute that the period length of 1/p2 is p times that of 1/p. Of course 11 is already a Wieferich prime in base 3 but 3 is just too small. 129.104.241.193 ( talk) 02:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Are you able to comment on this nomination(?); there's no obligation. Thanks, Sandbh ( talk) 05:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
This German song is inspired by Erlkoenig, which you mentioned on your user page. It really got me at the end when I first heard this song.-- R8R ( talk) 18:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Template:Charles-Valentin Alkan/doc has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Gonnym (
talk)
09:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | |
story · music · places |
---|
Thank you today for Nihonium, introduced (in 2018): "This article is about is the first element recognised to have been discovered in Asia, and we can hope that there will be more in our march to the end of the periodic table, wherever that happens to be."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:58, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
The redirect
Triambus has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 1 § Triambus until a consensus is reached.
GTrang (
talk)
23:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)