This is a great graph that summarizes extremely large earthquakes well. A version with axis labels would be handy.
Thank you very much for this graph. I was wondering if you would be willing to do a variant to illustrate the important point that deaths are not well predicted by earthquake size (even if you take into account tsunamis)? Since there are many very deadly earthquakes with a moment magnitude of <8, this doesn't show it as clearly as it might. A graph that showed that population density and earthquake preparedness have major and opposite effects on the number of deaths would also be very useful. Apart form off-wiki uses, it could be used in
Thanks, HLHJ. That's an interesting idea. I think such an illustration is appropriate for an article specifically describing the correlation between death toll and population density/preparedness. Do you have one such article? If so, do you have data from a reputable source? Finally, good catch on the axis labels. I'll update it if I manage to get my Perl interpreter working; I've moved on to Python. cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ14:19, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, David. I am honored by your invitation. I had wanted to speak about my work with dynamic (interactive and animated) SVG creation at Wikimania 2015 but missed the scholarship deadline. In case you'd like to see some of my other ideas, I wrote up a short sections on
I'll be glad to participate in your talks with W3C and Wikipedia, and collaborate with editors who wish to develop more dynamic SVG. If it's ok with you, can we keep the discussion in this section for now? (I've moved your message here to keep the thread together.) Cheers! cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ23:37, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Menger sponge, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tetrix. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I tried to ungroup this SVG file with no success. I wanted to simplify the image to compare the mirrors of just the TMT and a few others with the scale of the human, excluding the basketball court etc, to make the thumb more easily readable and make a comparative illustration that is directly relevant to secondary sourcing comparisons. Could you help me out? Is there something I need to do to unlock the file in Inkscape before it can be ungrouped? I couldn't figure that out.--Mark Miller (talk) 19:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Mark. The SVG was hand-coded and not designed to be edited in Inkscape. If you open the SVG file in a text editor, you'll find that each object has been put in a distinct group, denoted by <g ...> ... </g>. Just delete the groups you don't want, and optionally edit the translate(x,y) values to move the remaining ones around. If you wish to upload it to Wikimedia, please call it a different name instead of overwriting the existing file. Let me know if you need further help. Cheers, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ22:57, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, this would be a different image entirely but for now this reminds me that I was discussing this image with Viriditas who felt it should return and I agreed that text could be sourced to make the image more relevant. I forgot all about that so I should re-add the image until we have something more specific. Even then, this has enough consensus to go back.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:05, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I found your page after seeing your bilinear interpolation graph (Bilinear_interpolation_visualisation.svg). I was really impressed with all of your work!
I made a small modification of this file for use during math presentations--only the labels are changed. Are you okay with me using this file, and if so, how would you prefer to be acknowledged? Should there be a link to the original file?
Hi! That's a shame. Can you please get someone else who is knowledgeable in this to verify that this new algorithm is correct, before I spend extra effort in updating it? Thanks, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ13:33, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's understandable. I've asked for help to review the article, but it's hard to find anyone to do it I think. I've also taken the extreme liberty of producing a successor illustration based on yours, with just the permutations and not the transcript. Hope you think this is ok. I realize I'm not as good as you with svgs and illustrations!, but I wanted to do as well as I could until further improvements are possible. As you can see, the corrected version of the algorithm is much prettier, only one swap between each state. The first sentence in Heap's article from 1963: Methods for obtaining all possible permutations of a number of objects, in which each permutation differs from its predecessor only by the interchange of two of the objects, are discussed.sverdrup (talk) 14:12, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well done on correcting the graphic, Sverdrup. Your version looks excellent and less cluttered without the transcript, so you needn't be modest about your illustration skills! The algorithm is indeed more elegant, so I've taken the liberty to put in colour-coded captions to show the pattern. Thanks for your hard work! Cheers, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ23:12, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zenith, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liquid mirror. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I am a student trying to reproduce Rømer's experiment in working out the speed of light, however I can not find a database with observable (which of course is required as the difference in observable time is what allows us to work out the speed of light) times for the eclipse of J's moon, Io. On the wiki page about the speed of light you have uploaded a picture (at 22:41, 26 April 2014) of distance against time of earth and jupiter, with the time delay written above. I was wondering if you possibly have results that I may use as data for my project. Ideally 226 data points would be amazing (as there are roughly 226 Io eclipses in an earth year) but anything that can be used would be great. That way I can graph the difference in observed eclipse times with actual eclipse times and the difference would hopefully give me the speed of light.
Good to read that you're trying the classic experiment for yourself. To tell you the truth, I simulated the times by assuming that the speed of light was known and calculating backwards to make the graphic.
P.S. Since you asked nicely, I've reformatted and cleaned up the data on the ESO page (unfortunately with only minute resolution) to user_talk:cmglee/Io-Jupiter_eclipse_times — good luck!
Dear Cmglee,
Thank you so much for reading my message! However both these links appear to be eclipse times, without the required observable time delay that gives the speed of light. The reason I think it is so hard to find such data is because observable times are impossible to have a whole years worth of data due to readings of eclipses being under the horizon or wrong side of Jupiter. However I was hopeful to find at least two observations (opposite sides of Earths orbit, one closest and one furthers from jupiter) of an event maybe already part of an experiment related to Rømer's calculations.
You're welcome! Indeed, the time delay between the eclipse's actual start/end and its observation on Earth is unknown, but it doesn't matter. The difference in the times of successive starts/ends lets one estimate the speed of light as one can calculate by how much farther/nearer it is from Jupiter as Earth's orbit around the Sun has been established.
A simplistic way of looking at it is to imagine a clock synchronised to the average period of Io. When Earth is at conjunction (farthest from Jupiter), the eclipse is observed 8.3 minutes too late; at opposition (nearest Jupiter), it is 8.3 minutes too early. This implies that it takes 8.3 minutes for light to travel the extra (or reduced) distance i.e. the radius of Earth's orbit around the Sun. If you read through the text on http://www.eso.org/public//outreach/eduoff/aol/market/experiments/advanced/skills302.html , you'll find some formulas and exercises to let you estimate the speed of light using the data in the table.
Thanks for your change: "The second property above implies that each pair of the integers with the same background colour in the 4×4 square below have the same sum, and hence any 2 such pairs sum to the magic constant." These are 8x7/2=28 sets of four cells, if you add the 16 2x2 subsquares (including the broken ones), the four rows and the four columns you will have 52 subsets with the same sum 34 and used at a geometric shape which can be shifted using wrap around technics. Please note that these patterns are independent of the content of the used square. Please note that 5, 7, 9 and 13 also sums to 34. However if this pattern is shifted the sum changes.
At test I collected many items (and links) related to the most perfect magic squares. Before adding step by step some items we should clarify the names used for these type of squares.
The SVG animations will come at the end of the work. They should mainly relate to transformations and constructions.
FYI: If you interpret / see / define the replacement of the cells from one square Mi to another square M0 you will get a matrix which can be used for the transformation of any of the 384 squares. This operation and the set of squares define a non communicative group with the transformation from (any) arbitrary chosen M0 to M0 as the group identity. The transformation replacing each cell with its complement located at a diagonal offset of n/2 is a special transformation which forms the commutative core together with the identity transformation.
It is interesting that the transformations do not map any arbitrary combination of the 52 sets to subsets. The 8 diagonals and the 4 geometric pattern similar to that formed by a1,1, a1,3, a3,1 and a3,3 form a 12 element subset which will be mapped into itself. While the Frénicle standard form preserves orthogonality it should be noted that any 2x2 subsquare may be transformed to another 2x2 subsquare, to a row or to a column. I have some videos on this (file:Rakonto 09 deu.ogv in German).
2007 I created at meta nested templates for all transformations. I could identify a subgroup of the 384 transfoormations homeomorph with the basic (eight element) quaternion subgroup: ±1, ±i, ±j, ±k . At m:Meta:Requests for deletion#multiscript_collaboration I asked for the undeletion of that work. +1 corresponds ro the identity and -1 to the complement.
2009 I created some videos about transformations which I will upload as OGG files to c:Commons:Story (game) - multilingual interdisciplinary collaborative work#Media (examples).
Are you using skype? Regards ·לערי ריינהארט·T·m:Th·T·email me· 17:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, לערי ריינהארט. That's quite detailed analysis above. It's beyond my maths knowledge to evaluate, but it seems quite reasonable. Can you update the magic square or most-complete magic square page (with references) and let's see what other editors think of it?
I'd rather keep the discussion on Wikipedia, if you don't mind.
Lastly, I'm unsure what "required info" you want added to the PNG file. Since you've created the SVG, the PNG can be obsoleted so it probably needn't be updated already.
Hi, Umutdurak. You can freely reuse the drawing as long as you add the credit line below; no permission form is needed :-) Ta, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ00:33, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Myowncompass ☺ Certainly! The credit line is fine, too. If you wouldn't mind, could you please link me to an online version of your poster? Thanks, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ13:13, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for making the interesting sankey for this subject. I didn't know about sankey diagrams before. Very cool!
You probably know this, but if not, even diagrams need WP:RS citation. Unless rules changed the last few years it is enough to include the cites in the image file; repeating the cites in the caption on any particular article is optional.
In the case at hand, it looks like you used numbers from the source listed in a section of the article. Rats.... the source appears to be not RS since it is a blog which does not show its own sources. In addition, the entire section of the article next to your diagram is plagiarized from that blog, so the text needs to be redone in any case.
Very cool way to show the energy budget, if we can source it correctly
Thanks for your observation and compliments. Since you retained the text and graphic until it could be resolved — and asked so nicely — I've managed to source the data and rewrite it as follows.
A Sankey diagram illustrating the Earth's energy budget described in this section — line thickness is linearly proportional to relative amount of energy.[1]
In spite of the enormous transfer of energy into and from Earth, it maintains a constant temperature because, as a whole, there is no nett gain or loss: Earth receives the same amount of energy via insolation (short-wave or ultraviolet radiation) as it emits via atmospheric and terrestrial radiation (long-wave or infrared radiation).
To quantify Earth's heat budget or heat balance, let the insolation received at the top of the atmosphere be 100 units, as shown in the accompanying illustration. Called the albedo of Earth, around 35 units are reflected back to space: 27 from the top of clouds, 2 from snow and ice-covered areas, and 6 by other parts of the atmosphere. The 65 remaining units are absorbed: 14 within the atmosphere and 51 by the Earth’s surface. These 51 units are radiated back in the form of terrestrial radiation: 17 directly radiated to space and 34 absorbed by the atmosphere (19 through latent heat of condensation, 9 via convection and turbulence, and 6 directly absorbed). The 48 units absorbed by the atmosphere (34 units from terrestrial radiation and 14 from insolation) are finally radiated back to space. These 65 units (17 from the ground and 48 from the atmosphere) balance the 65 units absorbed from the sun.[1]
defget_key(p1,q1,p2,q2):returnp1*MAX*MAX*MAX+q1*MAX*MAX+p2*MAX+q2MIN=0;MAX=4# MIN = 1; MAX = 7low=max(MIN,1)seen={}forqb1inrange(low,MAX+1):forqb2inrange(low,MAX+1):forql1inrange(low,MAX+1):forql2inrange(low,MAX+1):# if (qb1 + qb2 == ql1 + ql2):forpb1inrange(MIN,qb1+1):forpb2inrange(MIN,qb2+1):forpl1inrange(MIN,ql1+1):forpl2inrange(MIN,ql2+1):seen[get_key(pb1,qb1,pl1,ql1)]=Trueif(notget_key(pb2,qb2,pl2,ql2)inseenandfloat(pb1)/qb1>float(pl1)/ql1andfloat(pb2)/qb2>float(pl2)/ql2andfloat(pb1+pb2)/(qb1+qb2)<float(pl1+pl2)/(ql1+ql2)):print('%d/%d > %d/%d and %d/%d > %d/%d but %d/%d < %d/%d'%(pb1,qb1,pl1,ql1,pb2,qb2,pl2,ql2,pb1+pb2,qb1+qb2,pl1+pl2,ql1+ql2))
1/1 > 3/4 and 1/3 > 0/1 but 2/4 < 3/5
1/1 > 2/3 and 1/4 > 0/1 but 2/5 < 2/4
1/1 > 3/4 and 1/4 > 0/1 but 2/5 < 3/5
1/1 > 3/4 and 1/4 > 0/2 but 2/5 < 3/6
1/1 > 3/4 and 1/4 > 0/3 but 2/5 < 3/7
2/2 > 3/4 and 1/4 > 0/1 but 3/6 < 3/5
3/3 > 3/4 and 1/4 > 0/1 but 4/7 < 3/5
Template:Blakey 65moll.jpg K/T impact site has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Herostratus (talk) 17:04, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
