User talk:Das Nerd

Welcome!

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

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

also, thanks for helping fight the vandals :)

however, the templates you used don't exist :P

the list of speedy deletion templates is found here [1] -- getcrunk juice 22:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

heh, my bbbbbbbbbb key sticks. getcrunk juice 22:38, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to avert a vandal

Thanks for the unblanking -- just trying to avert a vandal (71.32.90.85), who has been vandalizing pages I edit. I will put the blanked articles back up in a few days, after the vandal goes away. Thanks. Madchen Hoch 17:40, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Can you help me by blocking the vandal? I don't know what to do. Madchen Hoch 17:58, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate it if you would do that for me later when he or she is awake. Madchen Hoch 18:22, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need your help

Hi, I need your help. User 71.32.90.85 is now vandalizing my user page as well. Thanks. Madchen Hoch 16:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Danko Georgiev

Dear Das Nerd, I wish to ban Danko Georgiev from Wikipedia for his repeated accusations of Fraud to me regarding my experiment [2] on the talk pages. My experimental results were verified by faculty from Harvard and other schools. I will not allow this idiot to ruin my reputation. He must be repudiated by the Wikipedia community. Any help you can offer in this regard would be appreciated.-- Afshar 06:58, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template

I saw your comments on the Florida page and thought you might want to use this template for your user page.

USF

This user attends or has attended
the University of South Florida.
Go Bulls!

Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 07:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits by --Michael C. Price on Afshar experiment page

Dear Das Nerd, --Michael C. Price insists on using unsubstantiated claims without proper references on the article page. Regardless of the nature of his claims, I have requested that he does so, but instead he has produced at best irrelevant quotes from non-peer-reviewed sources. His edit follows:

Though Afshar's work is still the subject of ongoing interpretation and discussion, a significant portion of the scientific community is of the opinion that Afshar's experiment does not refute complementarity.

Some general criticisms are:

Bohr's philosophical views on the Complementarity Principle are generally seen in accordance with the Schrodinger wave equation. Since the latter is obeyed in Afshar's experiment it is not obvious how complementarity can be violated.^[1]^[2]

The modern understanding of quantum decoherence and its destruction of quantum interference provides a mechanism for understanding the appearance of wavefunction collapse and the transition from quantum to classical. As such there is no need, in the decoherence view, for an a priori introduction of a classical-quantum divide as enshrined by complementarity. Any experiment that claims to violate complementarity needs to address this issue.

As Michael claims, those statments are supposedly "popular views" that preexisted my experiment, and as such must be present in peer-reviewed publication predating my work. All I have asked him to do is to provide such valid ref.s but he has persistently avoided doing so and instead engaged in personal attacks. He seems to have a lot of time on his hands to be on Wikipeida constatntly, but I don't. This is turning to oneupmanship, and I don't have time for such antcis. Maybe he would heed your request. Thanks!-- Prof. Afshar 13:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I will be discussing this issue with Michael Price on the article talk page, and would highly appreciate if you could monitor our discussion and interject when you deem fit. I'm afraid it might get a little testy, as Michael has been persistent on personal attacks. Thanks very much for your help. Best regards.-- Prof. Afshar 17:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This may be a silly question..

How did you get this count/info?

On November 30th 2005 Made 100th nomination for speedy delete; all were deleted.

Maybe I'm missing something simple somewhere, but I can't figure out how to get a list of the edits I've made to deleted pages. They don't show up on my "my contributions" list after they get deleted.. Perel 06:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A vs. An

Some words are exceptions. A one or a unit are examples. I believe universal is one of these exceptions. The discrepancy is because words like these don't begin with vowels when spelled phonetically (/ˈyunəˌvɜrs/). I'll leave it to you to do the right thing. Zorath 04:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

^ "There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Afshar's experiment." "And of course, the conventional quantum mechanics is compatible with the principle of complementarity." Lubos Motl at [3]
^ "Bohr would have had no problem whatsoever with this experiment within his interpretation. Nor would any other interpretation of quantum mechanics. It is simply another manifestation of the admittedly strange, but utterly comprehensible (it can be calculated with exquisite precision), nature of quantum mechanics." Bill Unruh at [4]

[motl-1] "There is absolutely nothing mysterious about Afshar's experiment." "And of course, the conventional quantum mechanics is compatible with the principle of complementarity." Lubos Motl at [3]

[unruh-2] "Bohr would have had no problem whatsoever with this experiment within his interpretation. Nor would any other interpretation of quantum mechanics. It is simply another manifestation of the admittedly strange, but utterly comprehensible (it can be calculated with exquisite precision), nature of quantum mechanics." Bill Unruh at [4]

[1]

[2]