User contributions for 96.237.148.44

27 June 2009

• 23:2023:20, 27 June 2009 diff hist +4,318‎ Talk:Fine-structure constant/Archive 2 ‎ →‎About alpha, Eddington, and numerology
• 20:4320:43, 27 June 2009 diff hist +2,337‎ Talk:Fine-structure constant/Archive 2 ‎ →‎About alpha, Eddington, and numerology
• 17:4917:49, 27 June 2009 diff hist +449‎ Fine-structure constant ‎ →‎Numerological explanations: More complete quote from Feynman.
• 17:3217:32, 27 June 2009 diff hist −5,770‎ Inverse-square law ‎ Revert a whole pile of WP:OR. This article is not about acoustics per se, but about the inverse square law which applies to gravity, EM, as well as acoustics. Tag: blanking
• 17:0617:06, 27 June 2009 diff hist +1‎ Fine-structure constant ‎ Undid revision 298933939 by Alphatronic Read the entire discussion page. Eddington's (or Gilson's) "research" that alpha = 1/137 is numerological.
• 03:5803:58, 27 June 2009 diff hist +1‎ Fine-structure constant ‎ Undid revision 298798915 by Alphatronic (talk) Caveat notwithstanding. It's numerology, by definition.

22 June 2009

• 15:5015:50, 22 June 2009 diff hist +613‎ Fine-structure constant ‎ Undid revision 297881182 by KarlFrei (talk) It's a reliable source to someone with some credentials postulating a mathematical val
• 03:1003:10, 22 June 2009 diff hist +26‎ Natural units ‎ →‎Heaviside-Lorentz units: Last touch up.
• 03:0203:02, 22 June 2009 diff hist +28‎ Natural units ‎ →‎Heaviside-Lorentz units: Linkify
• 02:5902:59, 22 June 2009 diff hist +28‎ Natural units ‎ →‎Heaviside-Lorentz units: Linkify
• 02:5702:57, 22 June 2009 diff hist +4‎ Natural units ‎ →‎Heaviside-Lorentz units: Linkify
• 02:5302:53, 22 June 2009 diff hist 0‎ Natural units ‎ →‎Heaviside-Lorentz units: sp. fix red link.
• 02:5202:52, 22 June 2009 diff hist +891‎ Natural units ‎ →‎Heaviside-Lorentz units: Like geometric units, H-L units do not define a complete set of length, time, and mass, without something else getting tied down.

3 June 2009

• 04:5204:52, 3 June 2009 diff hist +419‎ Talk:Parsec ‎ →‎"Misuse" section removed

23 May 2009

• 20:1920:19, 23 May 2009 diff hist +16‎ Word divider ‎ →‎History

16 February 2009

• 04:4204:42, 16 February 2009 diff hist +215‎ United States congressional apportionment ‎ →‎The Equal Proportions Method: It's originally called "Method of Equal Proportions".
• 04:3604:36, 16 February 2009 diff hist +336‎ Edward Vermilye Huntington ‎ Expanded reference regarding Huntington-Hill method. Added reference.
• 04:3104:31, 16 February 2009 diff hist +58‎ Joseph Adna Hill ‎ Disambig. Added reference.
• 04:2404:24, 16 February 2009 diff hist +848‎ Huntington–Hill method ‎ Added some relevant information and references.
• 04:0604:06, 16 February 2009 diff hist +445‎ Joseph Adna Hill ‎ Added reference to Huntington-Hill method.

15 February 2009

• 04:3604:36, 15 February 2009 diff hist +4‎ United States congressional apportionment ‎ →‎The Equal Proportions Method: Linkify geometric mean.
• 04:2904:29, 15 February 2009 diff hist +1‎ United States congressional apportionment ‎ →‎The Equal Proportions Method: Missed a symbol.
• 04:2704:27, 15 February 2009 diff hist +1,152‎ United States congressional apportionment ‎ →‎The Equal Proportions Method: Fixed some inconsistent math. Cleaned up a little. A little more expository.
• 03:2003:20, 15 February 2009 diff hist +22‎ United States congressional apportionment ‎ →‎The Equal Proportions Method
• 03:1403:14, 15 February 2009 diff hist +767‎ Talk:United States congressional apportionment ‎ →‎Can the Huntington-Hill method, sometimes called "method of equal proportions" be clarified or justified?
• 03:0503:05, 15 February 2009 diff hist +382‎ United States congressional apportionment ‎ →‎The Equal Proportions Method: Another reference.
• 02:1502:15, 15 February 2009 diff hist +202‎ United States congressional apportionment ‎ →‎The Equal Proportions Method: Added a more direct reference to census.gov regarding the apportionment method. It appears to be the law, but this geometric mean makes no sense.

14 February 2009

• 19:3019:30, 14 February 2009 diff hist +1,219‎ Talk:United States congressional apportionment ‎ →‎Can the Huntington-Hill method, sometimes called "method of equal proportions" be clarified or justified?
• 18:5818:58, 14 February 2009 diff hist +38‎ Talk:United States congressional apportionment ‎ →‎Can the Huntington-Hill method, sometimes called "method of equal proportions" be clarified or justified?
• 18:5718:57, 14 February 2009 diff hist +38‎ Talk:Huntington–Hill method ‎ →‎Can the Huntington-Hill method, sometimes called "method of equal proportions" be clarified or justified?
• 18:3518:35, 14 February 2009 diff hist +4,245‎ Talk:Huntington–Hill method ‎ →‎Can the Huntington-Hill method, sometimes called "method of equal proportions" be clarified or justified?: new section
• 18:3218:32, 14 February 2009 diff hist +4,245‎ Talk:United States congressional apportionment ‎ →‎Can the Huntington-Hill method, sometimes called "method of equal proportions" be clarified or justified?: new section
• 01:5701:57, 14 February 2009 diff hist +3,866‎ Talk:Hare quota ‎ →‎Can this or the Huntington-Hill method, sometimes called "method of equal proportions" be clarified or justified?: new section
• 01:4901:49, 14 February 2009 diff hist +3,858‎ Talk:Apportionment paradox ‎ →‎Can the Huntington-Hill method, sometimes called "method of equal proportions" be clarified or justified?: new section

13 February 2009

• 06:1406:14, 13 February 2009 diff hist +8,019‎ Pacifism ‎ Undid revision 270065128 by 166.122.10.93 (talk) There's no good reason to delete this section.

11 February 2009

• 23:1623:16, 11 February 2009 diff hist +777‎ User talk:Buridan ‎ →‎Hi Buridan. What don't you like about Enlightened self-interest?
• 22:5622:56, 11 February 2009 diff hist +376‎ Talk:LIGO ‎ →‎Dubious
• 06:1706:17, 11 February 2009 diff hist +508‎ User talk:Buridan ‎ →‎Hi Buridan. What don't you like about Enlightened self-interest?: new section

4 February 2009

• 00:2700:27, 4 February 2009 diff hist −314‎ Sampling (signal processing) ‎ →‎Theory: It "more or less" says nothing solid. Give us a big solid.

3 February 2009

• 00:0400:04, 3 February 2009 diff hist +21‎ ARM architecture family ‎ →‎ARM cores: Wikilinked first occurance of SoC to System-on-a-chip

31 January 2009

• 16:5016:50, 31 January 2009 diff hist +878‎ Talk:Planck units ‎ →‎new edit for invariant scaling
• 03:4603:46, 31 January 2009 diff hist +662‎ Talk:Anthropic units ‎ →‎I think that this is a good article ...
• 03:0603:06, 31 January 2009 diff hist +85‎ Dimensionless physical constant ‎ Make this a little more clear. The article should be (again) titled "Fundamental physical constant" or this lede should be put in a disambiguation page of that title.
• 02:5702:57, 31 January 2009 diff hist +4,777‎ Talk:Planck units ‎ →‎Need to revise 'Planck units and invariant scaling of nature'

30 January 2009

• 15:2515:25, 30 January 2009 diff hist +553‎ Talk:Planck units ‎ →‎Need to revise 'Planck units and invariant scaling of nature'