Jump to content

User talk:Amorymeltzer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wikidude57 (talk | contribs) at 00:10, 30 September 2009 (→‎Wikiproject Pokemon: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Charles Lockwood

Hello, Amorymeltzer. You have new messages at Talk:Charles_Lockwood_(author).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Additional section for "Works". Thanks. =)

Replied. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 16:35, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I left out those that were not needed to be listed under the new section. I added a new reference material from LA Weekly. I didn't get the part when you said you removed the disclaimer. Sorry about that. I'm kind of having a bit of difficulty now trying to improve the article, enough for the flags to be removed. I think I will need your help and guidance to achieve that. I hope you won't get tired of it or me. I appreciate your inputs, suggestions and feedback. Thank you. Jxc5 (talk) 09:21, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tired?! No way! I'm a bit swamped at the moment, but I'll stop by in a day or two to check out and help where I can. It's hard! Try working on some other articles to take a break and keep your sanity. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 04:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 September 2009

Please update your status with WP:VG

Dear WikiProject Video games member,

You are receiving this message because you have either Category:WikiProject Video games members or {{User WPVG}} somewhere in your userspace and you have edited Wikipedia in the recent months.

The Video games project has created a member list to provide a clearer picture of its active membership.

All members have currently been placed in the "Inactive" section by default. Please remove your username from the "Inactive" listing and place it under the "Active" listing if you plan on regularly:

Ideally, members are encouraged to do both, but either one meets our criteria of inclusion. Members still listed inactive at the beginning of November 2009 may be removed. You may re-add yourself to the active list at any time. Thank you for your help, and we look forward to working with you.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Local Supervoid

I'm reviewing your submission, and rather than having it as a disambiguation page what about creating it as a redirect to List of voids? I think that might be more helpful/useful for readers. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 13:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with that. 76.66.197.30 (talk) 13:59, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ragam (Culfest)

How come u know the notability of ragam ? It is unfair to delete indian article like this --naveenpf (talk) 03:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All I did was mark the RAGAM page for speedy deletion as a redirect to a deleted target. The actual article Ragam(Culfest) was deleted because there was a ProD tag on it stating that it was believed to not have met the guidelines for inclusion, specifically verifiable reliable sources proving notability. This definitely had nothing to do with any articles that either were or were not Indian. There was a period of seven days during which you could have contested the ProD, but if you ask the deleting admin they may be willing to give you a copy in your userspace to work on. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 04:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dark star question

Can you tell me what differentiates Black Star (semiclassical gravity) from Dark star and Dark star (dark matter)? I'm having a hard figuring out based on the content what separates the three from each other. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 22:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it:
  • Dark star (dark matter) - this type of dark star includes large amounts of dark matter, which the black star need not have. The density of this dark star is also much less than an ordinary star, and is dark, not because it is similar to a black hole, but simply because it doesn't generate much energy. It's a gas cloud that is prevented from collapsing further by thermal energy.
  • Dark star (Newtonian) - this type of dark star is a construct of Newtonian gravitation, and hence is not relativistic or conformant with quantum physics. It is essentially a Newtonian version of a black hole
  • Fuzzball - this type of stellar-derived object is a construct of string theory, as an alternative to the relativisitic black hole. Everything under the radius of the equivalent event horizon is made of string matter, and the edge is not a sharp horizon, but a fuzzy surface, that breaks the information conservation paradox by allowing information to escape in a pseudo-Hawking radiation manner.
  • Eternally collapsing object - this type of stellar-derived object is derived from special relativity's limit on matter travelling faster-than-light, as the theorizers propose that to create a black hole, matter must exceed the speed of light to crash into the singularity. Instead, the speed limit means that an extremely dense layer, short of creating an event horizon is created, and is eternally collapsing toward the centre, with time slowed infinitely as it collapses.
  • Dark energy star - this type of stellar-derived object is derived from the mass-energy equivalency in relativity theory, by hypothesizing that matter is converted into vacuum energy as it crushes down towards the centre, thus the space within the event horizon in a different vacuum state, and having a higher energy, naturally wants to expand, the inflationary tendency cancels out the gravitational crush of the mass of the star, preventing the creation of a singularity. Since dark energy is frequently described as vacuum energy, that is the name of the concept star, because cosmological dark energy causes the universe to expand
  • Gravastar - this type of star uses Bose-Einstein Condensate as the form of matter created during collapse, and supporting pressure due to Planck level exclusions to the smooth spacetime of general relativity with quantized space and time (Planck length and Planck time)

76.66.197.30 (talk) 03:59, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Amazingly comprehensive, thank you so much! So, is there then a reason to rename Black Star (semiclassical gravity) to Dark Star (semiclassical gravity), or is that definitely not an acceptable name? More importantly, have you thought about registering an account? You're definitely a great asset, and you look like you may be a great boon to to the Astronomy Wikiproject. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 04:41, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, all mention of the concept I found called it "black star" and not "dark star", so there does not seem to be any reason to rename it to "dark star". As the above shows, many of the alternatives to black holes are not called dark star. I would say that using the title "dark star" for the new article is infringing on WP:OR, unless a WP:RS can be found that uses "dark star" in this manner, then we'd have to determine which is the WP:COMMONNAME; as I suggested "black star" for the article name, I think that is the current common name for this particular concept.
As for creating an account, I haven't considered creating one in quite a while. I have been participating in WP:AST for quite a while, already. 76.66.197.30 (talk) 06:13, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You rock. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 11:46, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Pokemon

Hi, I was wondering why you messaged me saying I was part of Wikiproject pokemon, I took my name off the list almost 2 years ago now. thanks,Wikidude57SBC 00:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Amorymeltzer&oldid=316990136"