User talk:MaxEnt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Personal wiki[edit]

Greetings MaxEnt! You mention on your userpage that you run a personal MediaWiki for notetaking. May I ask, what is your operating system, and what was your strategy for setting up such as system? I have a non-technical mind for these things. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 21:45, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Fundamental interaction may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • via gravitation and electromagnetism. The strong interaction, synthesizing [[chemical elements]][[ via [[nuclear fusion]] within [[star]]s, holds together the [[atom]]'s [[atomic nucleus|nucleus]],

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:04, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Visual system[edit]

Hi. You appear to have some expertise in the visual system. I've been bothered for some time about the definition of "visual"! Back in the day, there were rods and cones and visual had to do with sight. Full stop. Then came chronobiology and later knowledge of intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells which have (almost) nothing to do with sight. I see the word visual used to include these 'new' cells and the work they do. But I also see this 'new' system described as non-visual.

According to the article visual system, Wikipedia clearly means that all of it is 'visual'. Is it simply wrong to refer to "non-visual" functions of the eyes & optic nerve etc.? That feels non-intuitive to me. I feel that vision = visual perception = sight.

(You needn't bother with this if you don't have time as it's borderline related to editing the encyclopedia.) --Hordaland (talk) 16:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your interesting (and amusing) reply!!
"One could argue that circadian regulation itself almost deserves to be regarded as a part of the visual system: we track night and day for the in large measure for the sake of synchronizing our wakefulness with optimal seeing conditions." Yes, and circadian regulation certainly appeared (long) before vision/sight. --Hordaland (talk) 16:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)