User talk:Garry Denke

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is not a Wikipedia article.

Garry Denke 17:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

$h = \frac{e^2 Z_0}{2 \alpha}$

h = e^2 * z0 / (2 alpha)

h = (1.60217653 x 10^-19 A-s)^2 * (3.76730313 x 10^2 kg-m^2/A^2-s^3) / [(2.00000000 x 10^0 rad/sr) * (7.29735256 x 10^-3 sr)]

h = 6.62606931 x 10^-34 kg-m^2/s-rad

$h = \frac{e^2}{2 \alpha \epsilon_0 c}$

h = e^2 / (2 alpha) * e0 * c

h = (1.60217653 x 10^-19 A-s)^2 / [(2.00000000 x 10^0 rad/sr) * (7.29735256 x 10^-3 sr)] * (8.85418781 x 10^-12 A^2-s^4/kg-m^3) * (2.99792458 x 10^8 m/s)

h = 6.62606931 x 10^-34 kg-m^2/s-rad

$h = \frac{e^2 \mu_0 c}{2 \alpha}$

h = e^2 * u0 * c / (2 alpha)

h = (1.6021765(31) x 10^-19 A-s)^2 * (1.25663706 x 10^-6 kg-m/A^2-s^2) * (2.99792458 x 10^8 m/s) / [(2.00000000 x 10^0 rad/sr) * (7.29735256 x 10^-3 sr)]

h = 6.62606931 x 10^-34 kg-m^2/s-rad

gravity and electro-magnetic key

"h" = http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?h

"e" = http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?e

"z0" = http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?z0

"alpha" = http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?alph

"e0" = http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?ep0

"c" = http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?c

"u0" = http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?mu0

"G" = http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?bg

gravity and electric force

$F = \frac{e^2 c^3}{2 \alpha hG \epsilon_0}$

F = e^2 * c^3 / (2 alpha) * h * G * e0

F = (1.60217653 x 10^-19 A-s)^2 * (2.99792458 x 10^8 m/s)^3 / [(2.00000000 x 10^0 rad/sr) * (7.29735256 x 10^-3 sr)] * (6.62606931 x 10^-34 kg-m^2/s-rad) * (6.67421000 x 10^-11 m^3/kg-s^2) * (8.85418781 x 10^-12 A^2-s^4/kg-m^3)

F = 1.21027188 x 10^44 kg-m/s^2

gravity and magnetic force

$F = \frac{2 \alpha hc^3}{e^2 G \mu_0}$

F = (2 alpha) * h * c^3 / e^2 * G * u0

F = [(2.00000000 x 10^0 rad/sr) * (7.29735256 x 10^-3 sr)] * (6.62606931 x 10^-34 kg-m^2/s-rad) * (2.99792458 x 10^8 m/s)^3 / (1.60217653 x 10^-19 A-s)^2 * (6.67421000 x 10^-11 m^3/kg-s^2) * (1.25663706 x 10^-6 kg-m/A^2-s^2)

F = 1.21027188 x 10^44 kg-m/s^2

United Kingdom

[1] Stonehenge

[2] Mr. Marcus Stone, the world famous British painter

[3] is not Dr. John F.S. Stone, the British archaeologist

[4] Open Access would help Encyclopedias avoid errors.

[5] Thank you. Garry W. Denke, Geologist/Geophysicist

[6] Talk:Stonehenge

Westminster Hall

Garry Denke 16:01, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Denoco Inc. of Texas

[7] TX [8] TX

1 Welcome!
2 List of notable works by Vincent van Gogh
3 Your revamping of the "Composer" catagories
4 Verifiability, not truth
5 Verification

[edit] Welcome!

WELCOME!! Hello, Garry Denke! I want to personally welcome you on behalf of the Wikipedia community. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you haven't already, you can put yourself in the new user log and the list of users so you can be properly introduced to everyone. Don't forget to be bold, and don't be afraid of hungry Wikipedians...there's a rule about not biting newcomers. Some other good links are the tutorial, how to edit a page, or if you're really stuck, see the help pages. Wikipedia is held up by Five Pillars...I recommend reading about them if you haven't already. Finally, it would be really helpful if you would sign your name on talk pages, so people can get back to you quickly. It's easy to do this by clicking the button (next to the one with the "W" crossed out) one from the end on the left. If that's confusing, or if you have any questions, feel free to drop me a ♪ at my talk page (by clicking the plus sign (+) next to the tab at the top that says "edit this page")...and again, welcome!

[edit] List of notable works by Vincent van Gogh

Hey, that was neat! Tyrenius

[edit] Your revamping of the "Composer" catagories

Hello. I've been noticing quite a few edits and deletions of certain catagories relating to composers. While there is certainly quite a bit of cleaning up to be done in these catagories, I've been noticing that some potentially useful catagories have been deleted. I've left a comment on the music portail noticeboard and am wondering if you might be able to react to what I've left there : [[9] ] Thanks in advance. Cordially Musikfabrik 20:53, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[10]

[edit] Verifiability, not truth

Articles in Wikipedia should refer to facts, assertions, theories, ideas, claims, opinions, and arguments that have been published by a reputable or credible publisher. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.

A good way to look at the distinction between verifiability and truth is with the following example. Suppose you are writing a Wikipedia entry on a famous physicist's Theory X. Theory X has been published in peer-reviewed journals and is therefore an appropriate subject for a Wikipedia article. However, in the course of writing the article, you meet the physicist, and over a beer, he tells you: "Actually, I think Theory X is a load of rubbish." Even though you have this from the author himself, you cannot include the fact that he said it in your Wikipedia entry.

Why not? Because it is not verifiable in a way that would satisfy the Wikipedia readership or other editors. The readers don't know who you are. You can't include your telephone number so that every reader in the world can call you directly for confirmation. And even if they could, why should they believe you?

For the information to be acceptable to Wikipedia, you would have to persuade a reputable news organization to publish your story first, which would then go through a process similar to peer review. It would be checked by a reporter, an editor, perhaps by a fact-checker, and if the story were problematic, it would be checked further by the lawyers and the editor-in-chief. These checks and balances exist to ensure that only accurate and fair stories appear in the newspaper.

It is this fact-checking process that Wikipedia is not in a position to provide, which is why the no original research and verifiability policies are so important.

If the newspaper published the story, you could then include the information in your Wikipedia entry, citing the newspaper article as your source.

[11]

[edit] Verification

The author of this page has made various claims, but I am unable to verify these claims from any other source. I am of the opinion that the information presented here may be completely false. If no one else finds any information, I recommend that the page be nominated for deletion.

--Justin Eiler 10:14, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[12]

After awhile, with practice,

you'll get the hang of it.

Garry Denke 16:01, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[13]

Hello. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Otherwise, people might consider your edits to be vandalism. Thank you.

Specifically, cutting and pasting a headline does not constitute verification. If you wish to verify an article, please make your links to the original document that contains the information, not to the index page of the website you are using.

Thank you.

[14]

"If the newspaper published the story, you could then include the information in your Wikipedia entry, citing the newspaper article as your source."

"STONEHENGE HAS BEEN SOLD TO A TEXAS TYCOON", Wiltshire Times, April 1, 1985, p. 1.

Newspaper article has been cited.

Garry Denke 16:01, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[15]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.

--Justin Eiler 04:30, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

[16]

"If the newspaper published the story, you could then include the information in your Wikipedia entry, citing the newspaper article as your source."

"STONEHENGE HAS BEEN SOLD TO A TEXAS TYCOON", Wiltshire Times, April 1, 1985, p. 1.

Newspaper article has been cited.

Garry Denke 16:01, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[17]

A "citation" is a link to the actual article, not to an archive that does not contain the article in question. (The Wiltshire Times archive only goes back to 2000, not to 1985.)

As far as the claims: Stonehenge itself is owned by English Heritage, while the surrounding lands are owned by the National Trust of England. No sale has been made to a Garry Denke or to anyone else.

In short, the claim that Stonehenge was sold is patent nonsense.

--Justin Eiler 16:09, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

[18]

"If the newspaper published the story, you could then include the information in your Wikipedia entry, citing the newspaper article as your source."

"STONEHENGE HAS BEEN SOLD TO A TEXAS TYCOON", Wiltshire Times, April 1, 1985, p. 1.

Well it was there Justin, thanks.

Garry Denke 16:01, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[19]

This is not a Wikipedia article.

Garry Denke 17:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/a/r/User_talk%7EGarry_Denke_a833.html"