User talk:Maschen

NO NEED TO WASTE YOUR TIME - I HAVE LEFT.

Welcome!

Hello, Maschen, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might findcollection of off helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Dmcq (talk) 21:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

List of Trig identities

Wikipedia doesn't allow peoples own work, see WP:Original research. That was a long contribution but I had to remove it, sorry. See WP:5P for the general principles but basically its about making an encyclopedia of things which has already been noted in books and suchlike. Dmcq (talk) 21:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Please desist from sticking in odd formulae you just think of. This is not a odd facts anybody thinks up on a day, it is supposed to be an encyclopaedia with notable facts, ones that come from a book or paper or suchlike. Please read WP:Original research and WP:Reliable sources, and WP:ISNOT] about what Wikipedia is not. Dmcq (talk) 11:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

New article

Defining equation (physics), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

• Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

Thank you for helping Wikipedia!

--Noleander (talk) 23:19, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Need dimensions in table

It looks like the Magnetism section of the new article is missing data in the "dimensions" column .. can you fill that in? If you dont have time, let me know, and I can probably do it. --Noleander (talk) 23:53, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

August 2011

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to [1]. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. SpinningSpark 16:27, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to [2], as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. SpinningSpark 16:28, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Dot and cross product

I've removed the addition of dot and cross product to complex number as it seemed inappropriate where it was even though cited. I've set up a talk section about to figure out what to do with it. Dmcq (talk) 15:35, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Unacceptable behavior

Maschen, you have recently used personal attacks, for example the phrase "bastard lunatic", in a discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics. This is unacceptable behavior. Please read the linked section and the rest of the talk page guidelines. There is no excuse for such language and it is distressing for the rest of us who are reading the talk page. RockMagnetist (talk) 04:50, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Fine, but the argument is dead. As F=q(E+v^B) said, apologies + it'll not occur again. Maschen (talk) 09:06, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

SVG for [[file:Basis.gif]] PLEASE!!!

Please... pretty please you would not mind to re-draw [[file:Basis.gif]] in SVG form? =) F = q(E+v×B) ⇄ ∑_ic_i 20:10, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, what do we have here? Fine, will do. Maschen (talk) 20:11, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Please come here!! Whatever users Rschwieb and Quondum tell you, please listen! They will be recommendations for the image so don't upload it yet! F = q(E+v×B) ⇄ ∑_ic_i 20:37, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for letting me know. Maschen (talk) 20:38, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Fast followup question

A answer you gave earlier seemed to point only to the rotation of Earth as ruining surface dwellers' chances of being inertial. If a surface dweller was on an Earthlike planet which (if possible) were not rotating with respect to the universe, then would the surface dweller be an inertial object? Thanks! Rschwieb (talk) 15:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

A request

I sincerely appreciate your help with articles, and the very nice diagrams that you have provided for articles that I have myself been working on. I am now disturbed about the Uncertainty Principle article because its intended audience should be the average well-informed reader (and not somebody who learned about it in first-year physics and has been made to get really acquainted with all the details in an upper-division course. I said some rather impolitic things, and somebody else has suggested that we use a diagram similar to the one that appears in http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/uncer.html#c2 because I mentioned that article as one of a few that do a better job than the current Wikipedia article. I don't think we can just steal the diagram, but there is no copyright on ideas (especially when they didn't belong to the article writer to begin with). Can you see some way to graphically explain the same idea, or maybe even do that article one better somehow?

Thanks.P0M (talk) 00:16, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I meant the diagram that comes right after the words: '"position" of the electron is completely uncertain.'

Maybe a way could be devised that would show the highly localized waveform being "grown" out of the superpositioning of many waveforms?P0M (talk) 00:21, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Replied at your talk page, sorry... Maschen (talk) 18:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I see you've been discussing here. I added some more suggestions at Talk:Uncertainty_principle#Sorry_C_rating. The function u(x,t) from wave packet would be very helpful there and here. The new figure you made seems to follow P0M's suggestion. I was concerned that it looked really busy, though. Maybe you could build the packet in the form of a movie, one plane wave at a time? It's not obvious how the packet emerges as a sum of the individual plane waves when they're all in a mess on the same plot. Teply (talk) 00:31, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

You wrote here while I was replying there... Maschen (talk) 00:33, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Teply beat me to it. A movie was what I had in mind, too. Maybe there could be four boxes that meet at the center to form a "+". In frame one of the movie a sine wave appears in the upper left. In frame two it moves to the upper right, and then immediately falls to the bottom right. In frame three a second sine wave appears in the upper left. In frame four it moves to the upper right and then falls immediately. Then in the bottom right there is a new wave form consisting of the addition of waves one and two. Then you do a few more...

Do you ever visualize things very nicely in a dream and wish that when you awake you could just push "save" and a little CD-ROM would pop out of your mouth? :-)

Thanks for your help.P0M (talk) 02:37, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

P.S. I think I should have waited until I was sure you are finished with final exams before mentioning anything about new images. P0M (talk) 17:58, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

It is hard to find slots of time, as it takes me a long duration just to create something simple, while everyone else can create fantastic images in zero time. Although PLEASE do not feel guilty! - given that you did not know in the first place it's NOT your fault at all. =)

Also - any future discussion on the uncertainty principle should be kept at the talk page (you knew that, but just to make sure). Thanks - both of you. Maschen (talk) 19:06, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

VERY (!!!) Unhappy to see you go!!!

I hope you will not stay away for a long time.

My own experience with Wikipedia has been that some of my fellow contributors have sought to dominate others. I hope that you have not suffered from people whose egos have control of them. (I have not followed your edits other than when we have been working on the same pages.) My only successful strategy for dealing with people who insist on their own stuff is to get the facts, get the citations, and at the same time keep my own ego from getting in the way and defeating me. By a long and circuitous route I learned of a method. I mutter to myself, "Ego, ego, ego..." and just keep doing it as I watch my ego melt away. Weird, but it works. Best Wishes! P0M (talk) 09:06, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Well - I disagree. See the following links [3][4][5], for that matter. There are many others where Maschen has fucked up WP before, see in particular [6][7][8][9](there was much opposition to his shitty changes in the last two links after the linked changes) but there are far too many to even count never mind seek and paste. At least he did the right thing in leaving, now WP is better for it!! :-) Hublolly (talk) 19:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Even when Maschen's images were correct - they were still cluttered, incomphrehensible, and craply coloured. :-( Hublolly (talk) 19:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)