text:
Interest Level
Grades PreK - 1
Reading Level
Grade level Equivalent: 1.6
Lexile® Measure: AD170L
Guided Reading: I
Type of Book: Lift the Flap Book
- Realistic Fiction
- Series
- Thanksgiving
About This Book
Thanksgiving is here, and it's time for a little puppy to learn what makes this day special. Biscuit finds out that this is the time to celebrate giving, spend time with family, and remember everything that he's thankful for.
Engaging foldout pictures reveal all the things that this playful puppy gets into: a fluffy leaf pile, a basket of pine cones, and even a bag of flour that falls on his head!
Ding-dong — who's that at the door? Fold out the page and find out with Biscuit.
Filled with charming interactive pictures, this warm and cheerful holiday tale follows Biscuit as he discovers the spirit of Thanksgiving.
Series Information
Biscuit is one peppy little puppy. All he wants to do is make new friends and play, play, play. He's very curious too, about everyone and everything. Follow him through the house, into the garden, and down the street for one fun adventure after another. Each book's soft and sweet illustrations provide lots of interesting details that support the easy-to-read stories. It's easy to see why this irresistible puppy has fans everywhere!
Items Added to Cart:
1 Paperback
2 Hardcover
1 Teacher's Edition
$48.99 Subtotal


text:
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dimension article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
|Archives: 1
|Dimension has been listed as a level-3 vital article in Mathematics. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
- 1 Physics
- 2 Penrose Section
- 3 Tesseracts as the Fourth Dimension??
- 4 new lead
- 5 Fourth Dimension
- 6 Higher Dimensions
- 7 Mathematics in the lede
- 8 Dimensional analysis
- 9 improve top figure
- 10 Super-Z Theory
- 11 Clean up this article ?
- 12 More revisions needed
- 13 A dimension is not a world
- 14 Circles are 2-dimensional constructs
- 15 Scientific Worldview
- 16 Other mathematical definitions of dimension
- 17 Only dimensions in space
- 18 Coordinate system diagrams
- 19 Merge proposal
- 20 Space-filling curve issue
- 21 Negative dimensions
- 22 Question
- 23 General Definition
- 24 Removed unsourced nonsense
- 25 Psychology
- 26 dimensional analysis of a unit of measure
- 27 Definition by mathematics
- 28 Mislabeling of lines in drawings
- 29 Should not the dimensions be force energy and matter basically
- 30 Simple
- 31 Technical drawing
- 32 Move of the article
- 33 Cartesian coordinate system illustrations
- 34 Navbox
- 35 Requested move
- 36 high dimensional spaces
Penrose Section[edit]
With the thought that someone might be interested in Penrose's singularity theorem, I added a section on it to the article. This was done in spite of the fact that the Wikipedia article on Roger Penrose states that one of the predicates associated with him is that of being a philosopher. It is therefore moot whether he may be considered to be an authority on the subject.Lestrade 13:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)Lestrade
- I have more trouble with the fact that the article about the book doesn't mention the theorem at all, and only says that Penrose was "skeptical" towards string theory. Can you put the info on the theorem into the book description? --Alvestrand 12:16, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- I can't find the theorem in the book, can someone give the page number Agingjb 12:59, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- I move we delete the Penrose section. If it is mentioned anywhere, it could be mentioned on the book page, or in a string theory page, or on Penrose's personal page. It does not contribute to the article in a substantial way. Rybu (talk) 00:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Tesseracts as the Fourth Dimension??[edit]
In this article, the author says that tesseracts represent the fourth dimension of space. But, I have read that a tesseract actually represents time squared, or the fifth dimension. Am I wrong in thinking this? And if so, why?--Princess Janay (talk) 15:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
- You may be right in thinking you read this, but in that case whoever wrote such a thing was producing gibberish. A tesseract is an abstract mathematical object that by itself does not represent anything other than itself. --Lambiam 20:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- I believe that the illustration of the tesseract represents the three dimensional shadow a tesseract would cast onto three dimensional space. Rsduhamel (talk) 19:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Humans measure space by using three dimensions.Lestrade (talk) 20:09, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Lestrade
Not Humans but it is Modern Mathematics that measure Space in three spatial dimensions only as there can not a dimension representing the negative count on number line,otherwise Human senses are capable of sensing & experiencing upto eighth Dimensions.Alkagl (talk) 07:22, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Tesseract can not be fourh dimension.The illustration and shadow theory is not correct.However shadow itself is fourth dimension,and always displays itself in an euclidian independent to the euclideans & spates which its the mother solid object's dimensions displays into. email@example.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 10:56, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
new lead[edit]
Hi, The lead section of this article seems to me to be too long and a bit confused/rambling. I propose the following shorter version. Please comment and/or amend and I'll put it up in a few days. Thanks Andeggs (talk) 00:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
In physics a dimension is a mode of linear extension of which there are three in space and one in time. Dimensions are equivalent to the axes in a Cartesian co-ordinate system, which in a three-dimensional system run left-right, up-down and forward-backward. A set of three co-ordinates on these axes specifies the position of a particular point. An event's position in time is specified if four co-ordinates are given.
By comparison, on flat surfaces (such as a plane or the surface of a sphere), a point can be specified using just two numbers; this space is said to be two-dimensional. On a one-dimensional line only one co-ordinate is needed. In mathematics, spaces with more than three dimensions are sometimes used to describe abstract objects and spaces for which no geometric picture is needed. In these n-dimensional spaces a point is located by a set of n co-ordinates {n1, n2, … nn}. Some theories, such as those used in fractal geometry, even make use of a non-integer or negative number of dimensions.
The concept of dimensions and co-ordinate spaces can be generalized to describe abstract parameters in other systems. For example in economics, dimensions are used to model economic parameters, such as demand, supply and price. The position of a point in this model would then refer to a particular set of values of those parameters.
- the latest version of this lead is here Andeggs (talk) 13:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Is this meant to be the whole lead? The way it starts, it is as if dimension is purely a concept of physics, and then one that only concerns aspects of space and time. I don't know what "a mode of linear extension" means. What happened to the mathematical meaning? The statement about the theory of relativity in the current version ([1]) is misleading; time is also a dimension, according to any reasonable definition of dimension, in the Newtonian universe. I agree that the introduction (and in fact the whole article) is a bit rambling and should be tidied up, but I'm afraid your version is not a viable replacement, nor do I see clear potential for it evolving into one. --Lambiam 21:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Lambian. I've put the latest version of it here. I think it is important to recognise that the most commonly used meaning of dimension in maths is an extension of the physical meaning (3 in space, 1 in time). Only by understanding 3D space can one generalize the concept to higher dimensions. We have to clearly state how many dimensions there are before proceeding.
- The problem we have is that dimension can refer to different things: 1) everyday meaning: height, length, mass, size 2) physical meaning (3 in space, 1 in time) and mathematical extension into higher dimensions 3) dimensional analysis 4) dimensions of equations. In my opinion this article should concentrate only on the second meaning.
- Finally, I agree "mode of linear extension" sounds odd but it does make sense and is the Oxford definition. I haven't yet seen a better one, although please suggest one if you find one. I hope we can collaborate on this. Thanks Andeggs (talk) 23:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Is this meant to be the whole lead? The way it starts, it is as if dimension is purely a concept of physics, and then one that only concerns aspects of space and time. I don't know what "a mode of linear extension" means. What happened to the mathematical meaning? The statement about the theory of relativity in the current version ([1]) is misleading; time is also a dimension, according to any reasonable definition of dimension, in the Newtonian universe. I agree that the introduction (and in fact the whole article) is a bit rambling and should be tidied up, but I'm afraid your version is not a viable replacement, nor do I see clear potential for it evolving into one. --Lambiam 21:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I think you should reach consensus before you make such drastic changes. The new version of the article you created looks like an approach to an article Dimension (mathematics), and in fact having a separate article on the mathematical meanings would be quite reasonable. But even limited to that aspect, valid content has gone missing, and there are other quite serious problems, such as that the so-called Introduction has no clear relation with the rest. An article just named Dimension, if not a disambiguation page, should treat the most common meanings, as given for example here. --Lambiam 20:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I agree that my edit was not reached by consensus but I hope you will appreciate that it was an honest attempt to be bold rather than an effort in malicious destruction. My main aim was to put the lead on a stronger and clearer footing. Although I will stand by the other changes, I will not die in a ditch pacefor them. Firstly, then, I think we should agree about the definition of dimension. I feel quite strongly that the one given on the page as it stands now is confusing. The two references I gave in the edit (this and this) are unequivocal: the dimension of a manifold is the mimimum number of coordinates needed to specify every point within it. From here all discussions of the physical world and mathematical functions follow. The definition in the current article talks about the 'paramters of a system' but this is just a looser version of the same thing (the parameters are the independent variables in a function). There is no great divide between the 'mathematical' meaning of dimension and any other meaning - so we should not unnecessarily shield the reader from the full concept (without of course plunging into formulae immediately!). Please let me know what you think and whether you agree Andeggs (talk) 00:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I did not like the article before your changes, but I was even more unhappy with your changes. Most readers will have no idea what a manifold is, and to even explain the notion requires a crash course in relatively advanced mathematics. You can't define 0 either by "The number 0 is the additive identity element of the ring of integers." Even though this is true, it has the effect of an obfuscation. There is no excuse for a lead to the article that is not understandable to a large majority of readers.
- Also, "not reached by consensus" is a bit of a euphemism; 100% of the reactions to your proposal were not positive. OK, that was only one reaction, but it was rather strong ("your version is not a viable replacement, nor do I see clear potential for it evolving into one"). I'm sorry I can't be more positive, but I think it is best if I am blunt here. --Lambiam 21:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Sure, but the version I posted contains references whereas the lead as it currently stands is not verifiable! We can make amend the proposed changes so that 'manifold' is better explained (perhaps "a type of abstract mathematical space" is more gentle than "a type of abstract topological space") but it is crucial that the definition is accurate and clear. At the moment the first defintion ('common usage') is misleading and more appropriate for a dictionary than an encyclopedia. The second definition ("dimensions are the parameters required to describe the position of any object within a conceptual space") is misleading and, by the way, uses concepts which are just as difficult to understand as those in the proposed defintion. In my view, we must veer towards the what the sources say. As well as Lambian's response, I would be interested in the reaction of other editors to these arguments. Andeggs (talk) 23:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I agree that my edit was not reached by consensus but I hope you will appreciate that it was an honest attempt to be bold rather than an effort in malicious destruction. My main aim was to put the lead on a stronger and clearer footing. Although I will stand by the other changes, I will not die in a ditch pacefor them. Firstly, then, I think we should agree about the definition of dimension. I feel quite strongly that the one given on the page as it stands now is confusing. The two references I gave in the edit (this and this) are unequivocal: the dimension of a manifold is the mimimum number of coordinates needed to specify every point within it. From here all discussions of the physical world and mathematical functions follow. The definition in the current article talks about the 'paramters of a system' but this is just a looser version of the same thing (the parameters are the independent variables in a function). There is no great divide between the 'mathematical' meaning of dimension and any other meaning - so we should not unnecessarily shield the reader from the full concept (without of course plunging into formulae immediately!). Please let me know what you think and whether you agree Andeggs (talk) 00:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Fourth Dimension[edit]
The fourth spatial dimension is 'VISION',as it always remain orthogonal at 180 degree at 3D surface, and is ever relegating perpendicular to axis x at 90 degrees in clockwise circulatory motion.It is 2-D disc perpendicular and 3D surface contact.Now,what could be the 5Th spatial Dimension!! Alkagl (talk) 14:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)188.8.131.52 (talk) 05:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Higher Dimensions[edit]
One does not need a Phd in physics to verify the existence of higher dimensions. Dimensions I might add, that are the exact same size as man's 3-dimensional world. Further reading on the simple field observations that can be performed to verify their existence, can be found at "wikipedia interdimensional hypothesis" and at "wikipedia bigfoot". In the United States at least, we are fortunate to have real life and benevolent beings that can eagerly assist us in getting a handle on the truth surrounding the higher dimensions. Much of the arbitrary hypothesis in print on the higher dimensions, including the tesseract and hypercube, are lacking in even the slightest circumstantial evidence to convince us of their validity. Although I am no physicist, the controlled varying of the vibration of certain quanta string energy loops, (the most basic building block of matter), appears to have infinitely more merit since it seems to be compatible with simple field observations. This type of string theory is described in detail, in a book entitled "X3", by Adrian Dvir.220.127.116.11 (talk) 20:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Mathematics in the lede[edit]
The first sentence of the lede section states that the term "dimension" has various different, although related, meanings
- in common usage,
- in mathematics, and
- in physics.
The lede then further proceeds to give an overview of the meanings in these three areas, in that order, devoting a paragraph to each. The last two are elaborated upon at length in later sections.
Recently another paragraph was added to the lede, starting with: "In mathematics ...". That makes two paragraphs in the lede starting "In mathematics ...". That doesn't make sense. If something essential is missing from the existing mathematics paragraph, or something is essentially wrong with it, that should be fixed by editing that paragraph and not by putting another one next to it.
I did not see anything essential in the parallel paragraph missing from the existing lede. The term "manifold" is mentioned, but in my opinion that is unnecessarily technical for the lede, and best left to the existing subsection Manifolds of the section In mathematics. I removed the new paragraph with edit summary first read the whole lede before insterting (sic) a paragraph. However, this was reverted and the paragraph was re-added.
I'll remove it again, and hope that will be the end of it. --Lambiam 19:27, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- I reject the idea that 'dimension' has three different meanings. It has two. The first meaning is identical in both mathematics and physics: "the dimension of a manifold (a type of abstract topological space) is roughly defined as the mimimum number of coordinates needed to specify every point within itCurious About AstronomyMathWorld: Dimension].". The meaning in common usage is basically a poorly-understood version of the mathematical/physical meaning and in my opinion is not worth elaborating on. The second meaning is actually about dimensional analysis.
- Unfortunately the lead on this page is currently a bit of a muddle, leaving a novice no clearer about what the definitive meaning of the term is, even though there is one. I suggest we 1) remove reference to the "common usage" version, which is confusing 2) tighten the description of the mathematical/physical definition 3) simply signpost towards the page on dimensional analysis rather than discuss it here. I would appreciate it if you could address these suggestions. Please also recognise that the version I added to the lead contains references, whereas no other statement in the current version does. To just remove it because it does not fit with the existing material comes across as unhelpful. Andeggs (talk) 22:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- In the context of a vector space, the dimension is the cardinality of a basis of that space. In some cases this may coincide with the dimension in the sense of a manifold, but not all vector spaces are manifolds. and, moreover, even if they are but the vector space is over the field of the complex numbers, the definitions differ by a factor of 2. so they are definitely not equivalent. This is not abstruse mathematics used by only a few mathematicians; it is a quite common meaning of dimension in mathematics. So if you believe the term "dimension" has only one meaning in mathematics, you are definitely mistaken. This should be clear if you take the effort of reading on beyond the lead section. There many different meanings in mathematics are given. --Lambiam 18:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
- Yes we certainly could add reference to the dimensions of vector spaces in the lead. How about after "...Generalizations of this concept are possible, and different fields of mathematics use different, specialized definitions." we add something like "For example, the dimension of a vector space V is given by the Hamel dimension, the cardinality of a basis of V." Andeggs (talk) 18:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
- In the context of a vector space, the dimension is the cardinality of a basis of that space. In some cases this may coincide with the dimension in the sense of a manifold, but not all vector spaces are manifolds. and, moreover, even if they are but the vector space is over the field of the complex numbers, the definitions differ by a factor of 2. so they are definitely not equivalent. This is not abstruse mathematics used by only a few mathematicians; it is a quite common meaning of dimension in mathematics. So if you believe the term "dimension" has only one meaning in mathematics, you are definitely mistaken. This should be clear if you take the effort of reading on beyond the lead section. There many different meanings in mathematics are given. --Lambiam 18:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Dimensional analysis[edit]
I would like to remove references to dimensional analysis from this page since it is a different concept and has its own page dedicated to it. Please say here if you object to me removing this content (which is repeated on the dimensional analysis page) and adding an otheruses template. Thanks Andeggs (talk) 18:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
- I object. Even though it is a different concept, the treatment of the notion of dimension in physics related to the type of measurement should refer to dimensional analysis. --Lambiam 18:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Why? As you say it is a different concept. Dimensional analysis is not the "treatment of the notion of dimension to measurement" but rather a completely different tool for understanding variables and their relation to one another. They happen to share a similar title (and nothing more) so the link should be a an 'otheruses' one. Andeggs (talk) 22:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- I agree, dimensional analysis is about units, not dimension. At most it deserves a place here to emphasise that dimensional analysis is a misnomer and would be better called unit analysis. This is much like how the current article explains that dimension in common sci-fi usage is also a misnomer. Since dimensional analysis is clearly marked in the disambiguation page it's not really appropriate here. Rybu (talk) 23:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
improve top figure[edit]
It would be nice to improve the top figure. The square should be shaded, so it is clear that it is the interior that has dimension 2, not the boundary. For lay people, the term square is as likely to mean the boundary of a square as it is likely to mean the 2 dimensional shape, I believe. Oded (talk) 02:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Super-Z Theory[edit]
This is something that I came up with. Please state any errors I may have made if you find any.
"In mathematics the dimension of a space is roughly defined as the minimum number of coordinates needed to specify every point within it."
And if the concept of multiverse is true then there must be another dimension that should be used to specify an object's position within that continuum of parallel universes. Moreover, a different parallel universe is created for each possible movement of every quantum in existence.
Therefore, out of the numerous quanta, one quantum should be selected to represent the origin of this dimension. It can be absolutely anything. For example, it can even be an elementary particle that is part of my ass.
So, now that a quantum has been selected to represent the origin, this should then be the observer particle for every other quanta in the universe, therefore causing it to be viewed as stationary (even if it IS moving, Einstein's special theory of relativity states that "all uniform motion is relative, and that there is no absolute and well-defined state of rest", which explains how we do not feel the movement of Earth around the Sun nor its spin.
This then can be used to calculate the change in position of every other quanta in the universe, which will allow one to identify which multiverse an object is present in, ergo inevitably compelling this to be a "coordinate needed to specify every point within a space."
Feel free to criticise me. I've read all the arguments going on in this page, and I am expecting at least everyone who read this bullshit to disagree with this. Don't let me down. (But please PLEASE state why my theory is scientifically incorrect and specify what part of it makes it so. Thanks. Looking forward to hearing from you.) Asiant X13 (talk) 07:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
- Your post is completely irrellevant and has no place here. Rybu (talk) 22:13, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
I understand shadow is the fourth coordinate and is constitutive of seperate spatial euclidian from its mother solid body distributed in space in its three coordinates. alok agrawal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 12:35, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Clean up this article ?[edit]
This article is a mess. I move that the Penrose singularity theorem section, dimensional analysis and negative dimension sections all be erased or minimized. Penrose's singularity theorem doesn't contribute anything to the article. Moreover, it's vague, and poorly stated. Dimensional analysis is something that should be linked to from units as it is not properly concerned with dimension, and Mandelbrot's negative dimension section is pretty much vacuous as written. IMO the whole Physics section is poorly thought-out. Classical physical theories include *many* very high-dimensional models as anyone who has spent any time using Hamiltonian or Lagrangian mechanics can tell you -- consider the problem of a hanging cable, for example. Classical physics considers that to be an infinite-dimensional problem. Basically, there is no special usage of dimension in physics, no more than in any other science other than the fact that they use the word. So, after a lot of edits I think the article is a bit less random looking and more on-topic. Rybu (talk) 23:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
More revisions needed[edit]
I've made quite a few small revisions to the article. Some things need further modification like the first picture in the article, where the caption really is asking for more. Rybu (talk) 03:28, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
A dimension is not a world[edit]
A dimension is a way of measuring space in any one of three directions: height, width, or depth. It can also be a way of measuring time, but this is not a proper use of the word. It is, however, not a world. Therefore, it is incorrect to use the word "dimension" as though it signifies the concept of a universe, cosmos, or world, as in "He came from another dimension."Lestrade (talk) 12:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)Lestrade
- Who decides that? Wikipedia is descriptive, not prescriptive. If the word has been used in that capacity by authors, then it's fair enough to report it. That sense of the word is used frequently in science fiction literature and other genres. One might think it's incorrect to use the word "dimension" in that way, but that doesn't prevent the fact that it has indeed been used as such. Xantharius (talk) 21:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Then the article should inform readers that the original meaning of the word has been extended to contain foreign or alien meanings. If not, then confusion will result from the ambiguity of the word.Lestrade (talk) 23:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)Lestrade
- If you think it makes it the article clearer, go ahead and make the changes. Xantharius (talk) 16:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- Then the article should inform readers that the original meaning of the word has been extended to contain foreign or alien meanings. If not, then confusion will result from the ambiguity of the word.Lestrade (talk) 23:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)Lestrade
Circles are 2-dimensional constructs[edit]
The first paragraph of this article is in error. A circle is not a 1-dimensional object that lives in 2-dimensions. (Whatever that might mean) A circle requires two coordinates to define it, not one. In addition to the "polar coordinate angle" one also needs the radius. (In the clock example offered later, one also needs to know the length of that clock hand) Cajarr (talk) 19:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- No, that is not the case. You only need radius if you're describing more than one circle. A fixed circle has a fixed radius. That's why points on a fixed circle only need 1 coordinate to describe their position, the polar angle. Please provide references to your assertion that the initial paragraph is in error -- the article refers to several references that back up this point -- flatland for example. Rybu (talk) 06:43, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
- Rybu you are misreading your sources. Neither of the citations in the intro para says that a circle is one dimensional or a one dimensional construct "living in" two dimensions. Quite the contrary, both sources state that a circle is a two dimensional construct. Any construct with measurable area is two dimensional. The circumference of a circle, on the other hand, can be a line segment (a one dimensional construct) describing the perimeter of a two dimensional space and requires only one coordinate to describe the location of any point along it. You are confusing two different things. A line describing the circumference of a circle is what the second source calls a "'dragged' version of a zero dimensional space", whereas the circle itself is two dimensional. Your statement that "you only need radius if you're describing more than one circle" is false. A fixed circle does have a fixed radius, but that is not why only one coordinate is required to describe a point on its circumference. Only one coordinate is needed because the circumference can be described by a line, a one dimensional construct that does not exhibit area. The statement that "the circle is 1-dimensional even though it exists in the 2-dimensional plane" is poorly worded and misleading, because it is unclearly describing two different things: a two dimensional area and a one dimensional construct describing its perimeter. The later statement, "Returning to the circle example: a circle can be thought of as being drawn as the end-point on the minute hand of a clock, thus it is 1-dimensional," is also false as a circle is not an end point on a line segment. If you mean to say that you are extending a line from a fixed point, you might be describing the radius of a circle, but you are not describing the circle itself, which has two dimensions. It is true that dragging a 0-dimensional construct can create a 1-dimensional construct, but what you are dragging is a line describing the radius of your unit circle, which is itself another line: both the dragged radius and the unit circle are 1-dimensional spaces, but the circle they jointly describe is 2-dimensional. I challenge you to find any of the listed references (including Flatland, for example) that supports your version of the facts. To be fair, Cajarr erred also: the polar coordinate angle is the intersection of a radial line (or radius) with the circumference; they are essentially the same thing. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 23:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
A circle doesn't have an area. You're thinking of the two-dimensional area x^2 + y^2 <= r^2. Strictly speaking, a circle is x^2 + y^2 = r^2, i.e. the one dimension surface that bounds that area.
It doesn't matter how many coordinates you need to define a circle; that will depend on the dimensionality of the space in which the circle is embedded. What matters is how many coordinates you need to specify a point on a given circle. For any given circle you can specify a point on it with a single parameter; therefore a circle is a one-dimensional object.
Hesperian 00:24, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- This had me confused, too, until I realised that correspondents here are talking at cross-purposes. A circle is indeed two dimensional - but only if it is filled (or solid - ●). Otherwise it is a one dimensional object sitting in two dimensional space - basically a line whose two ends have been brought together and the rest of the line arranged so that it forms a smooth curve (○). Such a circle does not have two dimensions because it is to all intents and purposes "empty". The only meaningful measure is its circumference, which is one dimensional. However, in order to be represented it must be embedded in at least two dimensional space - just as a Moebius strip is a two dimensional object but must be represented in three dimensional space.
- Think of it this way: a sphere can be either solid (filled, like a billiard ball) or empty (hollow, like a tennis ball). It is sensible to talk about the co-ordinates of a point located somewhere inside a solid sphere, which is three dimensional, but not for an empty or hollow sphere, which consists only of its "skin" - and is therefore two dimensional (it has no volume - although it could be said to enclose a volume). The assumption made here is that the thickness of the skin of such an empty or hollow sphere is to all intents and purposes immeasurably thin.
- I don't know whether it would be helpful to distinguish between the different types of object in the article - i.e., emphasize the nature of the one dimensional versus two dimensional circle.
- Kudos to Rybu for making me think hard! :) AncientBrit (talk) 17:07, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
All unit types,measuring the angular deviation,essentially are measurements of angular respective positions between two spatial coordintes joining on same axis.Wherefore the moment we talk of measurement in angular degrees,it must be a talk of 2-dimensional display system.Wherefore a circle can not be a one dimensional continuation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 13:56, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- Hi there anonymous person at IP address 126.96.36.199. Flatland, Munkres "Topology" text, Dugunji's topology text, any manifolds textbook on the planet (guillemin and pollack, for example), they all support this notion of dimension. It's the standard notion of dimension used throughout most of mathematics. I have reverted your edits. In the future, please log-in -- anonymous edits tend not to be taken very seriously, especially if they completely change the meaning of the article. Rybu (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Scientific Worldview[edit]
Here's an original idea, so sorry I cannot cite any references. If we take the word 'dimension' to mean a fundamental aspect of our reality, where a minimum set of dimensions can fully envelope (or provide a framework) for describing our reality, then I would say that the universe has five dimensions. These are 4-d spacetime currently accepted in the mainstream scientific view, plus a fifth dimension - a non-physical dimension of mind or spirit. The fifth spiritual dimension does not influence the mechanics of the physical universe, however it encapsulates things such as perceptions, emotions, and a sense of right or wrong (just to name a few examples). People with a purely physical view of the universe would say that mind (or spirit) is comprised of the purely physical, ie. just chemical and electrical signals in the brain. People with a bit more imagination might agree that thoughts and feelings, perceptions, memories, dreams, expectations, love for family and friends, concepts of ownership, concepts of tribe or nation, concepts of right and wrong - are more than just chemical and electrical signals in the brain. In other words, if we want a rational scientific view that can encapsulate all aspects of our reality, it needs to include the non-physical (mind/spirit). This theory need not be falsifiable, because at its very roots scientific understanding rests on assumptions based on common sense. String Theory (from theoretical physics) suggests there may be 10 or 11 or so higher dimensions. But if these are just more physical/spatial dimensions at a sub-atomic scale, then wouldn't they be redundant? (ie. overlapping with 4-d spacetime)Crazygrandpa (talk) 11:03, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- Without references and citation this is original research or opinion, and as such doesn't really have a place on Wikipedia. Sorry. Xantharius (talk) 13:23, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Watch Illusions of Space Dimensions and Time Travel to clarify the definition of Dimension. —Preceding unsigned comment added by StudyLakshan (talk • contribs) 23:04, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
- You can if you want to, but it doesn't have anything to do with this article. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Other mathematical definitions of dimension[edit]
Would anyone be sad if I added a few more topological definitions of dimension? In particular, this article lacks any mention of partition dimension, or discussion of when the different definitions of topological dimensions are equivalent (ie., on separable metric spaces, etc.) Druiffic (talk) 20:12, 6 December 2008 (UTC)Druiffic
- Hi there Druiffic. This article functions as more of a front-line non-technical article where at best the main idea is delivered, and lots of hyperlinks are given. IMO it'd be best to farm off any technical bits to their own articles, and link to them from here. There's already a Lebesgue covering dimension article. There's a Hausdorff dimension article, etc. I think wikiproject mathematics tends to want to keep the technical bits to a minimum here since this is a very popular article -- everyone seems to have an opinion on it. Lots of anonymous edits, especially to the first paragraphs. Rybu (talk) 18:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Only dimensions in space[edit]
The way i see it, the first part of the article only concerns dimensions in space. Should the description not go further than that i.e give a more general explenation of the matter? Is it not a narrow description of 'deimensions' to say that it only governs space? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ConferAll (talk • contribs) 18:04, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- What non-spatial aspects of the word "dimension" do you want discussed? The article later brings up the way dimension gets used for things like space-time and Kaluza-Klein type theories. Is there something else you're referring to? A lot of people (me included) tend to think of space-time as just another type of space, in the general topological sense of the word. That's one of the reasons why KK and space-time doesn't enter the front of the article, as it's just a compound concept, built off a primitive concept described in the lead. Rybu (talk) 18:56, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Coordinate system diagrams[edit]
I have been working on some coordinate system diagrams based on the work of InductiveLoad and I think they might be relevant for this page. If no-one objects I'll add them shortly. Thanks Andeggs (talk) 17:56, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
- Very nice. Some of those diagrams would likely help the article if incorporated well. Rybu (talk) 03:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Merge proposal[edit]
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
User:Jmath666 has proposed a merger of Dimension with Dimension (vector space).
- Oppose - vector space dimension is a very specific meaning of dimension, but is sufficiently notable and has enough material to deserve an article in its own right. Gandalf61 (talk) 09:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose. Dimension of vector spaces is a particularly important type of dimension, and deserves its own article. --Zundark (talk) 10:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose. The whole point of having a separate dimension article from specific notions of dimension is so that this article can be general, and specific articles can dive into particular technical notions. Rybu (talk) 03:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose. For the reasons given above, though I think that this page could use some more material on dimensions of vector spaces. In any case, since there seems to be a consensus (and since Jmath666 has not provided any reasons for the proposed merger) I am closing the request. Jim (talk) 19:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Space-filling curve issue[edit]
At some point this article should probably address the issue of space-filling curves. Ie:you can find an onto continuous function [0,1]-->[0,1]x[0,1]. So some readers might be concerned that dimension is not well-defined, or that the square is 1-dimensional, etc. IMO this isn't a major issue but maybe it should be worked into the mathematical section, somewhere pretty deep in the article so that it doesn't confuse people early. Rybu (talk) 22:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
- Does such a curve really exist? I doubt it, at best couldn't you only cover points that have a rational component, but still always miss uncountably many other points? Cesiumfrog (talk) 00:48, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Negative dimensions[edit]
Since there are positive dimensions (1, 2, 3, 4, ...) and even a zeroeth dimension (0, a point), would it theoretically be possible to have negative dimensions (-1, -2, ...)? Like an imaginary dimension (just like )?
I personally think it wouldn't be possible, but maybe it could be.
Thanks, 126.96.36.199 (talk) 16:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- I don't see negative dimensions cropping up much at all. I think the only time I see it crop up is as a description for the empty set. Some people consider the empty set to have any dimension (vacuously), some say it has dimension -1. You also get negative dimensions in certain rather formal boring ways, like as gradings of various algebraic objects like chain complexes, etc. These kinds of negative dimensions have a pretty tenuous hold on the word dimension. Rybu (talk) 19:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
What is the term for the number of dimensions in a coordinate system? Dimensionality?· CUSH · 18:10, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
General Definition[edit]
Dimension is a relative concept used for analysis, where one dimension is mutually exclusive to another dimension.
This definition clarifies controversial areas like: parallel universes, string theory, M-theory, wormhole
Fantasize on parallel dimensions, fold/branch dimensions and tunnels between dimensions contradict with the above definition.
Reference: Illusions of Space Dimensions and Time Travel StudyLakshan (talk) 23:43, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
- This should not be in the article unless a reliable source can be found. YouTube videos are hardly ever reliable sources. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 00:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Removed unsourced nonsense[edit]
I have twice removed the following unsourced section added to the article by new user SpikeTD:
- "The "three dimensions" is the way that humans (and possibly many other animals) orient themselves to their environment. The human body is imagined to have six planar surfaces: 1), 2), top of head and soles of feet, corresponding to walking on the surface of a sphere; 3), 4) a symmetry of arms and legs, etc., regarded as "left-right" and necessary for efficient locomotion, and, 5),6) a "front" and a "back" surface, the front being that which faces in the direction of vision and locomotion. The three dimensions are six imaginary projections, one from each of these surfaces, and are not an observable part or characteristic of the universe. The concept's lack of universality can be understood by conceiving of a tetrahedral creature, which would orient itself using four imaginary projections rather than six, and would thus employ the most simple and efficient means of orientation possible.
- "Time" is a similarly imaginary dimension. While events seemingly occur prior or subsequent to other events, a 'road' upon which these events occur has no observable presence. A clock only counts the number of times it ticks, and the duration of an event can only be measured in terms of multiples of the duration of other, briefer events."
Not only is it unsourced original research, it is also complete nonsense. Clearly earthworms and starfish do not inhabit a universe of different dimensions from us just because they have a different body plan. Gandalf61 (talk) 13:27, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- The point here is that the universe does not really have dimensions. Dimensions are a mental tool -- and only a mental tool -- that an entity might use to determine its orientation to its environment. Whatever form the entity might have, and whatever system of dimensions it uses, doesn't endow those qualities to the universe as a whole beyond being one point of view among an infinite possible. SpikeTD (talk) 14:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- At the moment this appears to be just your own opinion. If you want to add this to the article then you need to cite a reliable source that says this. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello. In psychology the concept of dimensions is prominent (it is a theoretical approach which differs from the criteria-driven approach that is the medical model). I would appreciate it if someone in Wikipedia would start a page on dimensions in psychology, & that that page be referenced on this page (i.e., a link to dimensions in psychology). That would be most helpful.184.108.40.206 (talk) 17:54, 10 October 2010 (UTC)Dean Pappas
- I imagine the notion of dimension you're interested in should be linked to the [disambiguation page] rather than this page. Moreover, if you want to make a request you should probably go to the appropriate [wikiproject psychology] chat page where requests can be made. Rybu (talk) 22:36, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
dimensional analysis of a unit of measure[edit]
I think a paragraph should be added to deal with the dimensions of a measurement (units of phisical quantities). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 14:46, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- That's covered in our artcile on dimensional analysis. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:49, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
Definition by mathematics[edit]
The word dimension, after studying relativity and the way mathematicians and physicists describe the universe in general, means something specific to me that I believe the mathematical definition here should be similar to.
Physics: Space has 3 dimensions. Time has 1.
Math: Numbers are used to describe position along a number-line type concept. The imaginary number i, for instance, is 90 degrees between the negative and positive of a number line, must be plotted in another physical dimension, and therefore its own dimension in its mathematical context. Time, when plotted against position in a space-time diagram, takes up another physical dimension to draw, so therefore should be considered another dimension in its context. Basically, anything which is separate in any situation by a linear counting, should be considered another dimension in its context. A plotting of suicide rates should be considered a dimension against the dimension of time, for example, since it is a counting of something different, but combines with the other dimension to create a 2 dimensional picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 13:16, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Mislabeling of lines in drawings[edit]
In the section "In physics" subsection "Spatial dimensions" are presented a set of drawings. Both the "Cartesian (2-dimensional)" and "Cartesian (3-dimensional)" drawings have mislabelings. We'll start with the "Cartesian (3-dimensional)" drawing first. The drawing has the x, y, and z axises are labeled correctly, but for the point "P" the lines leading to "P" are mislabeled. The z line is parallel to the z axis, but the x line and the y line are orthoginal to there respective axises. The x line and the y line need to be parallel to the x axis and the y axis. For the "Cartesian (2-dimensional)" drawing the axises are labeled correctly but the lines leading to "P" are mislabeled. Once again the x line and the y line are orthoginal to there respective axises. Katacomb (talk) 02:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- The 3 dimensional Cartesian is correct as I see but your right about the 2D one DARK HUNTER X (talk) 18:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Should not the dimensions be force energy and matter basically[edit]
1st dimension = force same from all sides even tilting the area used to measure makes force from left side come in and from the right most side go out 2nd dimension = goes through matter anywhere but in a single direction 3rd dimension = is full every where and keeps moving as per what we can count due to general theory of relativity with no motion and exact stillness you would have froznen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khpatil (talk • contribs) 10:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Apparently you make a confusion of the subject of this article with Dimension of a physical quantity. I have added a hatnote in the article to avoid such a confusion. D.Lazard (talk) 10:26, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Under "additional dimensions" this article speaks about space possible having 10, 11 or 24 dimensions. I find this difficult to understand, but the Simple English version doesn't help much either. Can we have some volunteers in the Simple English article please (here)? Pass a Method talk 12:56, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Technical drawing[edit]
Doesn't "dimensions of an object" have a different meaning than described in this article? There are references to this article form articles like (for example) Production drawing. --Hardi27 (talk) 23:22, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
- When you find such a link, consult Dimension (disambiguation) and change it appropriately. —Tamfang (talk) 02:37, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- The meaning of "dimension" you are talking of is explicitly given in the first line of Dimension (disambiguation) --D.Lazard (talk) 10:12, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Move of the article[edit]
I have moved Dimension to Dimension (mathematics and physics) because its content may not be considered, by most readers, as the main topic (see above section Technical drawing), the primary meaning being "dimension of an object", described in the first line of Dimension (disambiguation). After this move, Dimension (disambiguation) should normally be moved to Dimension. But, before this move, it is better to modify all links to Dimension into links to here. Due of the number of these links, I have asked on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation#Move of dimension to Dimension (mathematics and physics) some help for a robot making these redirects. An editor has commented "That's a pretty verbose qualifier". Here is my answer:
- "I agree that it is a verbose qualifier. I have chosen it because the article begin by "In mathematics and physics, ...". Rereading the article, it appears to be about a single topic that is called "dimension of a space" in mathematics, "dimension of the space" in physics, "number of dimensions" (fourth dimension, for example) or "degree of freeness" in other contexts. For the moment, it seems to me that the best title would be "Dimension of a space". I'll start a move discussion on the talk page on the basis of what precedes."
Thus, I starts here a discussion on the best title of this article. IMH, "Dimension" should be avoided because of the ambiguity with the common meaning of the word (dimension of an object), "Dimension (mathematics and physics)" is too long and too restrictive (there is a section "Literature" in the article). I suggest Dimension of a space, but a consensus is needed. D.Lazard (talk) 17:45, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- I would actually suggest "dimension (mathematics)". "Space" is a rather vague term in this context. (Is an algebraic variety a "space"?) In physics, the term can also refer to the dimension of a quantity.TR 22:00, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- Note that mathematics is, more or less, only half of the article, and Dimension of a physical quantity exists. Also, a variety is, without any doubt, a topological space, and its dimension is, at least for a real variety, its spatial dimension. D.Lazard (talk) 22:17, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Cartesian coordinate system illustrations[edit]
The letters marking the coordinate values in the illustrations for the 2 and 3 dimensional Cartesian coordinate systems appear to be inconsistent.
In the illustration for 3-dimensions the x,y,z values are parallel to the X,Y,Z axes, however in the illustration for 2-dimensions they seem to be reversed. Kelly F Thomas (talk) 16:15, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
- You are right: the blue and red x and y in the 2D figure must be exchaanged. However I am not able to edit figures. Can somebody do that? D.Lazard (talk) 16:42, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
"Dimension" has various, strongly related, meanings. Therefore this article is a WP:DABCONCEPT article. However the high number of notions of dimension makes that the dab aspect of the article may be unclear, or, at least, the reader may have difficulties to find the article which contains the notion of dimension that interests him. This dab role is well played by the navbox. Therefore, I have moved it in the lead, although it is not the common usage. (For the other article in which this navbox appears, the right place is, as usual, at the bottom of the article). D.Lazard (talk) 09:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Requested move[edit]
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: moved. Number 57 15:57, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Dimension (mathematics and physics) → Dimension – per WP:BROADCONCEPT, basically. Note that the article was previously moved away from dimension after light discussion above, and dimension still redirects to it. Also, the current parenthetical disambiguation, "mathematics and physics", is erroneous as the article includes sections on literature and philosophy. For those concerned about primary topic status, beyond even the indications of WP:BROADCONCEPT, my cursory examination of page views indicated this article to be more viewed than all other articles combined on Dimension (disambiguation). For those concerned about topical specificity, may I suggest peeling off separate, dedicated (single-word disambiguated) articles as necessary. ENeville (talk) 18:19, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Opposeand comment. IMO, the primary topic is the dictionary definition "A dimension of an object is its spatial extent as measured in some relevant direction, such as its length, width, or height.", which does not deserve a WP article ("Wikipedia is not a dictionary"). Above quote is the first line in Dimension. Where should it be placed if the proposed move will be accepted? Therefore, I object to this move. However, I agree that the present title is not convenient. In preceding discussion, it was proposed Dimension of a space. I suggest also Dimension (geometry). Both are less restrictive than the present title, and, I guess that physicists may accept to consider that they are doing some geometry. Nevertheless Dimension (geometry) could need more explanation for the layman. Therefore, finally, I would prefer Dimension of a space or, maybe, Dimension (space). D.Lazard (talk) 20:46, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support because the move will do no harm (dimension already redirects here) and is an improved title (this article is not specific to math+physics). To alleviate DL's objection I've added measurements to the hatnote-linked dab page. Cesiumfrog (talk) 06:17, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- IMO the new item of the dab page does not agree with the dab guidelines (I have not checked) and is not useful. However if the move is done, the article must have a hatnote like "For the dimension of an object, such as its length, width, or height, see Measurement. For other uses, ...". With such a hatnote, I does not oppose to the move anymore. D.Lazard (talk) 08:48, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
high dimensional spaces[edit]
would it be worth having a section describing the idea of high-dimensional spaces used in AI (word embeddings 'word2vec' etc). 'higher dimensional spaces appear in... ' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fmadd (talk • contribs) 01:02, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
- Wikipedia level-3 vital articles in Mathematics
- Wikipedia B-Class vital articles in Mathematics
- Wikipedia B-Class level-3 vital articles
- Mathematics articles related to geometry
- Frequently viewed mathematics articles
- B-Class mathematics articles
- Top-Priority mathematics articles
- C-Class physics articles
- C-Class physics articles of Mid-importance
- Mid-importance physics articles
- Start-Class Philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Philosophy articles
- Start-Class metaphysics articles
- Mid-importance metaphysics articles
- Metaphysics task force articles

subset: commoncrawl


text:
A week before President Obama is to deliver his State of the Union address, Sen. Robert P. Casey of Pennsylvania is joining a growing chorus of Democratic legislators calling on Congress to raise the federal minimum wage.
In a wide-ranging conference call with reporters Tuesday that focused on income inequality, Casey reiterated his support for the Fair Minimum Wage Act, a bill introduced last year that he cosponsored. Supported by Obama and other Democrats, the bill would raise the national minimum wage to $10.10 an hour from its current $7.25.


text:
Course Directory: United States / Virginia / Marion
Marion, Virginia Golf Courses & Discount Tee Times
Whether you're visiting Marion, Virginia for business or recreation, make a round of golf one of your top priorities. Marion, Virginia has many outstanding options for the avid golfer, including a wide variety courses and plenty of tee times to fit your schedule. Plan to play a new course during your stay in Marion, Virginia and take advantage of the incredible deals on tee times available through GolfNow.
All Marion, Virginia Golf Courses
Holston Hills Country Club
18 holes over 6536 yards with a par of 721000 Country Club Rd
Marion, VA 24354-1500


text:
Feb. 28, 2014
PROVIDENCE, R.I. - The Providence College men's lacrosse team will face-off against Quinnipiac at 4:00 p.m. on Saturday, March 1. The contest will be played at the Bryant University Turf Complex in Smithfield, R.I. due to repairs being made on Lennon Family Field in Providence, R.I.
The Friars enter Saturday with an overall record of 2-0, having posted wins over Vermont (8-6) and Boston University (10-7).
Freshman attack Alex Corboy (College Park, Md.) leads the Friars offense with seven points on six goals and one assist. He has tallied a hat trick in each of the Friars' games this season. Senior Sean Wright (Silver Spring, Md.) and freshman Joseph Fitzpatrick (Rockville, Md.) round out the leading scorers with five and four points, respectively.
Providence has outshot its opponents, 79-63 and outscored its opponents 18-13. In addition, the Friars have capitalized on 3-of-4 man-up opportunities.
The Friars have been successful on 42-of-45 clear attempts for a .933 clearing percentage.
Sophomore Jake Newman (Mill Valley, Calif.) and freshman Colin McKendry (Cary, N.C.) have been battling at the face off "X" for the Friars and have helped set the tempo in transitional play.
Senior goalie Tyler Himes (Spring City, Pa.) has started both games in the cage and has collected 22 saves in 120 minutes of action and owns a .629 saves percentage.
SCOUTING QUINNIPIAC: Quinnipiac enters Saturday's match-up with an overall record of 0-1. The Bobcats dropped their season opener to Brown, 13-6, on Saturday, Feb. 22. Junior attack Michael Sagl leads the Bobcats offense with three points on one goal and two assists. Four additional players have found the back of the cage for Quinnipiac. Gill Conners and Jack Brust split time between the pipes for Quinnipiac in their first contest of the season, tallying five and seven saves, respectively. The Bobcats face off specialist won 11-of-21 attempts versus Brown, posting a .524 win percentage.
Official StoreOfficial Online
Will Mazzone and Michael...
Seniors Will Mazzone (Stony Brook, N.Y.) and Michael Perettine (Farmingdale, N.Y.) were named to the 2016 New England Intercollegiate Lacrosse Association (N...
Jarrod Neumann Named To...
Providence College men's lacrosse junior Jarrod Neumann (Springfield, Mass.) was named to the New England Intercollegiate Lacrosse Association (NEILA) ...
Will Mazzone and Michael...
The BIG EAST Conference announced the All-Tournament Team at the conclusion of the 2016 BIG EAST Tournament in Denver, Colo. last night.
Providence College Men's...
The Providence College men's lacrosse team fell to top seed and No. 1 ranked Denver, 17-8, in the BIG EAST Tournament Semifinal at the Peter Barton...
Men's Lacrosse To Play...
The Providence College men's lacrosse team (7-8) will travel to Denver, Colo. to compete in the programs' first ever BIG EAST Tournament against ...
Four Providence College Men&...
The BIG EAST announced the men's lacrosse All-Conference and Major Award winners for the 2016 season today. Four Friars were named to All-BIG EAST Teams.
Will Mazzone Named To BIG...
Providence College men's lacrosse senior Will Mazzone (Stony Brook, N.Y.) was named to the BIG EAST Weekly Honor Roll today (May 2).
Men's Lacrosse Falls To ...
The Providence College men's lacrosse team fell to No. 17 Villanova, 14-7, in its 2016 regular-season finale on April 30 in Villanova, Pa. The Friars...


text:
Clem BrazilShared publicly -
Agreed. But it should not have any political interest attached. Just informing the great unwashed should be enough. Along with the regulations already in place.
A LNP MP and doctor has embarked on a personal crusade to make Queensland aware of a deadly "plague" which has led to more deaths than the road toll.
Add a comment...


text:
Reading mode: Light Dark
Forum indexSony Alpha Full Frame E-mount TalkChange forum
Beginner question
Started Jun 3, 2014 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Problems solved A7R.
I assign "aperture preview" to button C3
Now the C3 button do the same than Nikon D800 front button, activate the diaphragm.
Reply Reply with quote Complain
|Post (hide subjects)
|Posted by
|Jun 3, 2014
|Jun 3, 2014
|Jun 3, 2014
|Jun 4, 2014
|Jun 4, 2014
|Jun 4, 2014
|Jun 4, 2014
|Jun 4, 2014
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow
Have your say
What's been the most exciting announcement of Photokina?
- Canon EOS M58.8%
- Panasonic G85/G803.3%
- Panasonic FZ2500/FZ20001.9%
- Panasonic LX10/LX151.2%
- Panasonic GH5 development3.6%
- Sony a99 II15.9%
- Nikon KeyMission 170 and 801.0%
- Fujifilm GFX 50S development28.3%
- Olympus E-M1 II development18.7%
- Olympus E-PL80.1%
- Olympus 25mm F1.2 Pro1.5%
- Olympus 12-100mm F4 IS Pro1.9%
- Olympus 30mm F3.5 Macro0.1%
- Sigma 85mm F1.4 Art3.6%
- Sigma 12-24mm F4 Art2.6%
- Sigma 500mm F4 DG OS HSM Sport2.4%
- GoPro Hero50.8%
- GoPro Karma drone2.2%
Total voters: 5,343
Latest reviews
Finished challenges
Most popular cameras
In-depth testingLatest Camera ReviewsBeyond the studio testsFeature Articles and VideosPIX VideosTalks, demos and panels711The Canon that canCanon EOS 80D Review372Touchscreen street shooterFujifilm X70 Review2164Upwardly mobileSony a6300 Review339Power ZoomPanasonic Lumix ZS100/TZ100 Review2501Retro through-and-throughFujifilm X-Pro2 Review
Top threads in this forum
Most bookmarked in this forum
Top posters in this forum


text:
Dorothy J. ArnadoFebruary 28,2013Dorothy J. Arnado Rites
The memorial service for Dorothy June Arnado, 77, of Rutland, who died Feb. 17, 2013, was held Feb. 26, at the Tossing Funeral Home.
The Rev. Remigius Nthaondi, pastor of Immaculate Heart of Mary Church, officiated.
Words of remembrance were offered by family and friends.MORE IN Obituaries
Cheryl L. Muzzy
Cheryl L. Muzzy, 57, died Wednesday, Sept. Full StoryHarris Peel
DANBY Harris Peel, 92, of Danby, died Thursday, Sept. Full StoryTabert A. Julius
DERRY, N.H. Full Story
- Most Popular
- Most Emailed


text:
Durable Goods, Inflation Risk, and Equilibrium Asset Prices
Bjorn Eraker
University of Wisconsin - Madison - Department of Finance, Investment and Banking
Ivan Shaliastovich
University of Pennsylvania - Finance Department
Wenyu Wang
Indiana University - Kelley School of Business - Department of Finance
January 1, 2015
Review of Financial Studies (2016) 29(1): 193-231
AFA 2013 San Diego Meetings Paper
Kelley School of Business Research Paper No. 2015-01
High expected inflation is known to have a negative impact on future real growth. We show that this effect is significantly more pronounced in durable relative to non-durable goods sectors of the economy. Consistent with this macroeconomic evidence, the equity returns of durable-goods-producing firms have a larger negative exposure to expected inflation risks. We estimate a recursive utility model which features persistent growth fluctuations and inflation non-neutrality for durable and non-durable consumption. Our model can quantitatively account for the key moments of nominal bond prices and the levels, volatilities, and exposures of equity returns to expected inflation and bond returns.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 62
Keywords: durable consumption, inflation risk, long-run risks, equilibrium yield curve, equilibrium equity return
Date posted: March 17, 2011 ; Last revised: January 11, 2016
Suggested Citation
Contact Information
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Contact Us
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 1.875 seconds


text:
WhatsApp has finally updated the App for users to attach and share documents through the App itself. WhatsApp, the Facebook-owned messaging the service which has a little over a billion users, launched a new update today which allows the user to attach documents and share it with other users, a feature that has been on the waiting list for a while now. The feature works on similar lines across Android and iOS. On Android, the user needs to tap on the "Attachment" icon and select documents. You can also note that to make space for the "document" icon, WhatsApp has compressed the "photo" and "videos" option in to the "camera" option. On iOS, you tap on the arrow icon in the chat and then select "Share Document" from the menu that appears. Read More
We Are Waiting – WhatsApp For Apple Watch
The social messaging platform recently acquired by Facebook, WhatsApp has been one of the top players in the App industry for quite some time now. It's really surprising how they don't have a native WatchOS App for the much applauded Apple watch yet.
Apple's wearable technology, the Apple Watch is known for its ability to receive and respond to notifications in an instant without having to reach your pockets for your iPhone. Facebook Messenger was updated with a native Apple Watch App in October that allows users to send and receive voice clips, Likes, stickers and more through it. However, no such update has been made by the Facebook-owned, WhatsApp. Read More
WhatsApp Will Get Video Calling
It looks like WhatsApp is planning to roll out a video calling feature very soon but there is no news about its official release date. According to leaked screenshots of the WhatsApp video calling feature from private beta versions for iPhone by German website Macerkopf, one will be able to make the video call using either their phone's front or rear camera. The interface will be quite similar to the one seen in the voice calling feature and it is also expected to have a multi-tab feature so as to make it easy for one to switch between different conversations and groups. Read More
WhatsApp Gets Feature Updates On Android
The instant messaging giant WhatsApp has hit the Play Store again, rolling out an all new update. The update brings a new set of features like 'mark as unread', low data settings, custom notifications and more. According to Android Police, these updates has been added in a span of just 24 hours. Read More
Update WhatsApp On Your iOS Today And Get Free Calling
WhatsApp has just released an update for its iOS version that now adds voice calling. Voice calling has been available for Android users for a long time now, but Apple iOS users can make use of this as well. Very soon, this will be how everyone will call each other. Both parties need to have the latest version of WhatsApp installed to use voice calling. The new voice calling feature is rolling out slowly. Read More
In A Few Weeks, WhatsApp On iOS Will Get Voice Calling
In just a few weeks from now, iOS users of WhatsApp will be able to voice call each other from within the App for free. At Facebook's grand F8 conference, WhatsApp cofounder Brian Acton announced that the ability to voice call other WhatsApp users from within the App will arrive within the next few weeks. Read More
WhatsApp VOIP Call Screenshots Leak
Italian iPhone blog iPhoneItalia has posted screenshots of what seems to be an upcoming VOIP call feature of WhatsApp. Read More
WhatsApp Acquired By Facebook For $19B
WhatsApp's iOS 7 Design Update App Video Leaked
WhatsApp, the uber famous messaging App has yet to receive an update that brings new design for iOS 7 users. The update should be released fairly soon, but before that, someone has managed to get his hands on the new version and made a video out of it.
There are no new features in this upcoming new version, but the design change for iOS 7 feels absolutely stunning.
WhatsApp Messenger Goes Free on the App Store
One of the most popular mobile messaging App, WhatsApp, has just gone free on the Apple App Store. A few months (or maybe a year or more) ago, WhatsApp was offered for free, however, the developers decided to charge 99 cents for it, while the app remained free on the Google Play Store, but now it seems history has repeated itself, as they dropped the price to zero. Read More


text:
HourlyHours to be determined
Start DateMarch 19, 2013
YOUR EXAMPLE SITES MUST MATCH THE FEATURES LISTED BELOW!! DIRECT ME TO THE PRODUCT PAGE NOT THE MAIN PAGE. Failure to do this will result in decline of proposal.
Need to have the product images, size selector, color match this layout.
- Site uses CONFIGURABLE products
- On hover shoes out of stock are X'd out.
- When color is selected, more views images update with new color selected.
- You are only focusing on the size/color/image selectors on these page layouts.
This project will lead to other projects.
About the Client
United States
Detroit 05:17 PM
Jobs Posted
54% Hire Rate, 1 Open Job
Over $40,000
Total Spent
51 Hires, 4 Active
Avg Hourly Rate Paid
1,778 Hours


text:
Problem people
View Single Post
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: US
Posts: 1,831
I think the article does a decent job of pointing out possibly problematic behaviors - that may or may not be connected to a particular diagnosis - and how they can be problematic.
I find the most useful thing about the article is that it gives lots of examples of potential red flags in an organized way. It tries, and maybe does not always succeed, to point out behaviours (sometimes generated by diagnosable mental health issues, sometimes not) that can have, cumulatively, bad consequences. So it doesn't say to avoid sociopaths but rather, look out, analyse and, if necessary, avoid such and such behavior, especially if the behavior happens over and over in a pattern - which may or may not be result of someone being a sociopath.
I do think that if one already has good filters, has an handle on 'good' flags, and trusts one's intuition, then this article may not be that helpful. (See NYCindie's post above for example.)
However, lots of people, for whatever reason, don't trust their own intuition, don't have a sense of what is good, positive behavior, and have no idea what might be a red flag in a given situation. Sometimes, one's family doesn't model good behavior (Minxxa noted her own upbringing as being this way) or people are not encouraged to develop and rely on their intuition.
View Public Profile
Find all posts by opalescent


text:
Skip to comments.Obama advisers say bin Laden can appeal to U.S. courts
Posted on 06/17/2008 1:39:36 PM PDT by WesA
WASHINGTON (Map, News) - Barack Obama's foreign policy advisers said Tuesday that Osama bin Laden, if captured, should be allowed to appeal his case to U.S. civilian courts, a privilege opposed by John McCain.
Responding to questions from The Examiner, Sen. John Kerry and former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke said bin Laden would benefit from last week's Supreme Court decision giving terrorism suspects habeas corpus, the right to appeal their military detention to civilian courts.
If he were to be brought back, Clarke said of bin Laden, the Supreme Court ruling holds on the right of habeas corpus.
Kerry, who applauded the Supreme Court ruling, said it will be carried out by whichever candidate wins the presidency.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
I believe in the right of habeas corpus mortis.
As I understand the horrendous SCOTUS decision, I think they are right.
Every time Kerry opens his mouth, I am more overjoyed that he lost in 2004.
They seem almost HAPPY that their buddy Osama gets to come to America and get a civil trial. Are these people for REAL?
I can't wait to hear Levin on this one.
Whichever one of you nails that pig-humper bin Laden with a double tap to the head will get a box of cigars and a bottle of the best Kentucky Bourbon I can find.
Stop resisting...
Stop resisting...
Tap, tap.
Problem solved.
The problem with this ruling is that it gives the military no incentive whatsoever to take these scumbags alive.
Maybe that's not such a problem after all...
That is exactly correct. Just tap him and go on about your business.
This is the second mistake Obama has made today. Things are looking up.
Surely McCain would find a way to not allow him to be tried in our courts...right?? Could he be found not guilty due to insanity??
The Dems certainly understand the concept behind "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". How else to explain the clear affection for Bin Laden expressed by Kerry and Clarke. What sad cases they are. What a sad party they represent.
If you are an enemy of the United States, you are a friend of John Kerry.
If he were to be brought back,
Says it all.
Absolutely. That is the necessary result of the Supreme Court's opinion.
And you better read him his rights before you arrest him, as well.
Rush had it right when he said this decision by the court basically means, take no prisoners.
>At this rate, we might take back Congress and will definitely keep the Presidency.
Stop drinking.
I can see Ron Kuby preparing his "Islamic Rage" defense now. Kuby and his ilk will be in court talking about Bin Laden and friends as freedom fighters and comparing them favorably to the Founding Fathers. And millions of liberals will nod and agree with him.
THIS should be on the fornt page of every piece of campaign literature McCain puts out.
Obama looks like the dumbest man who ever ran for President. He and Gore together couldn't make an I.Q. of 120.
National security ala Obama, Kerry, and Clarke.
God help this country.
No wonder Scalia gets depressed. If the Constitution is the most important thing to him and it seems to be, he watches as it is continually shredded. We would be better off with grade schoolers interpreting the Constitution.
Is anyone truly surprised? I know Obama supporters aren't...
My experience with Leftists is that they love trials because they are entertaining and their need to have one in this case has nothing whatsoever to do justice. They want a show.
Same rights as " Winnie the Pooh".
All is fair in "Love and War".
He's not just stupid, he's downright scary. It's like he wants Osama to be set free by the civilian courts. Extremists like him empathize with fellow-extremist terrorists more than they empathize with our own troops. See haditha for proof.
Another Democrat Party before country position(work for their trial lawyer lobby). Imagine an O.J. verdict thanks to the left.
This is really mind boggling. If Bin Laden is ever caught, he will be tried in a civilian court, apparently. He will have to be read his Miranda rights, and we will have to produce evidence, based on the laws used in civilian courts, that he conspired with Mohammed Atta and the boys to hijack the planes and crash them into buildings.
Amazing. A military court tribunal would be more justice than Bin Laden deserves, yet we will have to give him his rights as if he were an American citizen.
Maybe, if Bin Laden is ever caught, someone can administer justice to him, while superior officers look the other way?
Our new motto in the field; Take No Prisoners especially Barrys buddy!
Is this more wisdom from the Winnie-the-Pooh manual on National Security & Foreign Policy?
Personally, I think they would welcome Osama into the U.S. —to be Obama's running mate. Go Obama/Osama — For a REAL change.
Liberals=Quislings and morons.
Because locking up the 1993 WTC bombers for "life" protected that building from further attacks and prevented the terrorists from seeing their goal accomplished. < /s >
And after Bin Laden's acquitted by the OJ jury, Obama can appoint him Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. I'm sure he and his guys will be happy to clear as many city centers for redevelopment as they can.
"I do solemnly swear on this Koran here, that I merely SUGGESTED to the holy students that flying into the World Trade Center MIGHT disrupt the evil doings of the Jews and their hideous cousins the Christians in the Evil Land of Amrika. I never actually TOLD them to do it."
Is this serious? Kerry and Clarke are pleased by this? I hope it happens. Bring him back. Let the American people see the liberal establishment bending over backwards to protect OBL. Let the ACLU spend millions defending him. If there is any hope for this country the majority of decent Americans will be outraged. If not......goodbye "greatest nation on earth", hello "third world".
Why don't these guys just slap on a turban and take up the cause of jihad while they're at it??
Good f'n grief...
"If he were to be brought back,
The decision applies only to those brought back to US controlled territory or land (5 libs on SCOTUS ruled that Club Gitmo qualifies). If instead US forces captured him and detained him at a POW camp controlled by another country, then Habeas Corpus would not be applicable.
Go the next step...Headline: "Obama pardons Usama".
Well, if Bush had nailed Osama by now, this wouldn't even be a comment.
Imagine Barry as Prez, Joe "The Plagiarist" Biden as Veep, John "F'n" Kerry as Sec of State with Joe Wilson back in the Diplomatic Corps, Jamie "The Wall" Gorleick as AG, and Richard Clarke and Valerie Plame back in the intelligence community, or head of CIA, And Bill and/or Hillary in the SCOTUS....
After you get done puking, hold your nose and pull the handle for John McCain.
That was easy!
I would agree on the condition that he turns himself in to a Southern local court and appears in person. Many of us have some ammo we have to use.
Why in the world would we want to treat terrorist like the average criminal? We are at war with terrorist who wear no uniform so they can blend in with the innocent people they murder. There is no reason why they shouldn't be tried in military court, as enemy combatants . We are definitely our own worst enemy.
Sen. Christopher Dodd's father, who was one of the prosecutors at Nuremburg, would be rolling in his grave.
Be ashamed. Very ashamed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.


text: The Diablo wiki last edited by Deusoma on 09/01/13 03:21PM View full history OverviewThe Diablo games take place in a dark fantasy world known as Sanctuary, the mortal realm which lies between Heaven and Hell. In this world the player fights hordes of demons, undead, and other monsters to slay the evil which is corrupting the lands.Major CharactersPlayer CharactersColumn Head 1Column Head 2Character ClassGame AppearanceAmazonDiablo IIAssassinDiablo II: Lord of DestructionBarbarianDiablo: Hellfire (hacked class), Diablo II & Diablo IIIBardCrusaderDiablo: Hellfire (hacked class)Diablo III: Reaper of SoulsDemon HunterDiablo IIIDruidDiablo II: Lord of DestructionMonkDiablo: Hellfire & Diablo IIINecromancerDiablo IIPaladinDiablo IIRogueDiabloSorcererDiabloSorceressDiablo IIWarriorDiabloWitch DoctorDiablo IIIWizardDiablo IIIPrime EvilsDiablo - Lord of TerrorDiablo is one of the three Prime Evils of the Burning Hells. As the Lord of Terror, he is responsible for all of humanities fears, and filling humans with bloodlust. Although Diablo is younger than his two brothers, he is the strongest, and essentially the de facto leader of the three.Baal - Lord of DestructionBaal, the Lord of Destruction, is one of the Prime Evils who rule over Hell in the Diablo series. Despite being imprisoned within the body of the mage Tal Rasha, he eventually laid siege to Mt Arreat in the hope of destroying Sanctuary's most guarded secret: The Worldstone.Mephisto - Lord of HatredMephisto, the Lord of Hatred, is one of the greater evils that the player must battle in Diablo II. He is the eldest of his brothers but was the first to be sealed inside a soulstone by the Horadrim. Once Mephisto broke free from his shackles he set about corrupting the jungles of Kurast and forcing the high priests of Kurast, the Zakarum, into doing his bidding. He took the strongest of the priests, Sankekur and took over his body, essentially resurrecting himself in physical form. The Zakarum proved useful to Mephisto as they helped spread his evil influence throughout the area.Lesser EvilsAndariel - Maiden of AnguishFinal boss of Act I in Diablo II.Duriel - Prince of PainFinal boss of Act II in Diablo II.Azmodan - Lord of SinFinal boss of Act III in Diablo III.Belial - Lord of LiesFinal Boss of Act II in Diablo III.Supporting CharactersDeckard Cain - Last member of the HoradrimTyrael - An ArchangelMinor CharactersThe ButcherThe Butcher is (usually, though not always) the first boss in Diablo, who resides in a small corpse-filled room and wields a large cleaver which he uses to maim and kill his victims. The Butcher utters his signature line, "Ah, fresh meat!" and attacks, wielding his namesake weapon: the Butcher's Cleaver.In Diablo III, it is revealed that several "Butchers" exist. A new Butcher is the final boss in Act I of Diablo III.


text:
Remember that Walden's Title IV Code is 025042.
Call us now toll-free on1-866-492-5336 or
Do you live outside the US?
Call us now using these toll-free numbers or visit our International Students area.
As he prepares for commencement, Dr. Maxwell, a recent Ph.D. in Public Policy and Administration graduate, reflects on his Walden journey and goals for the future.
Melissa Perkins Bellanceau, master's degree graduate and PhD student, shares how her coursework influenced her to become an active social change agent.
Walden doctoral student Matt Glowiak honored as a leadership fellow at ACA conference.
Mathematics faculty member Tanaz Arteaga offers reflections in observance of Women's History Month.
Walden PhD in Health Services alumna teaches undergraduate students about life in her popular class, Death in Perspective.
For Walden graduates Anthony and Kimberly Price, being partners in life also means being partners in education.
When two members of the family decide to earn their master's degrees at Walden together, they lean on and learn from each other.
The annual Global Days of Service expands to a weeklong event, increasing opportunities for the Walden community to make a difference.
Spotlight on Walden is a collection of stories and insights from our students, alumni, faculty, and staff. Get to know the Walden community and see how they are making a difference. Share your story at firstname.lastname@example.com.
Click here to see all posts.
Or call 1-866-492-5336 to speak to an advisor
© 2016 Walden University


text:
Geneticist, Pediatrician
18 years of experience
Accepting new patients
18 years of experience
Accepting new patients
University City
3615 Civic Center Blvd
Philadelphia, PA 19104 Phone number & directions
3615 Civic Center Blvd
Philadelphia, PA 19104 Phone number & directions
Learn more about Dr. Sulagna Saitta:
View the full profile to get information on:
- Qualifications
- What's important to you
View full profile
Patient Reviews
Patient comments (0)
The overall average patient rating of Dr. Sulagna Saitta is Average.
Prepare before visiting Dr. Saitta
Asthma Patient Education Use our asthma patient education guide to talk to your doctor about the questions and concerns you have in formulating the right asthma treatment plan for you.Before Visiting Dr. Saitta Learn More
Specialties & Research
Dr. Sulagna Saitta, MD is board certified in Clinical Genetics (M.D.) and Pediatrics.
- She has special expertise in 5 areas:
- Chromosome Deletion
- Craniofacial Abnormalities
- DiGeorge Syndrome
- Multiple Abnormalities
- Syndrome
Education & Awards
Dr. Saitta graduated from Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia.
Dr. Saitta has 2 hospital affiliations:
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
- Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
- Bengali
- Italian
Home > Find a Pediatrician > PA > Philadelphia Pediatricians > Dr. Sulagna Saitta, MD
Similar doctors nearby
Dr. Rana Hamdy
5 years experience
Philadelphia, PA
Dr. Alysha Taxter
Philadelphia, PA
Dr. Mindy Li
Philadelphia, PA
Dr. Vivian Cheung
19 years experience
Philadelphia, PA
Dr. Shiang-Ju Kung
Allergy & Immunology
17 years experience
Philadelphia, PA
Dr. Jason Stoller
13 years experience
Philadelphia, PA
- Additional Information
- Dr. Sulagna Chakraborty Saitta MD is a female Medical Geneticist, has 18 years of experience and practices in Pediatrics, Clinical Genetics, and M.D..
- Where does Dr. Sulagna C. Saitta practice?
- Dr. Sulagna Saitta has 3 office locations.
Dr. Sulagna Saitta practices Pediatrics, Clinical Genetics, and M.D. near Philadelphia, PA.
Additional practice locations include: Los Angeles, CA.
See Philadelphia Pediatricians and Philadelphia Geneticists.


text:
The Binary Zone Interactive Retro Store is
currently closed for order processing.
Store will re-open on Saturday October 1st 2016.
In order to minimize dispatch times on orders currently in the system the
Binary Zone store is currently closed. As soon as we have caught up on all
of our outstanding orders the store will re-open. Please call back soon.
In the meantime, please check out the exciting new Psytronik Software
digital download section on the itch.io website -
The following games are now available from itch.io as digital downloads:-


text:
Notorious Simpsons heroes make but another appearance with their new naughty ways in this thread… Horny hooker craves for a huge ebony boner and right up her ass, blow it off ;) Simpsons hentai sluts are true pros at everything concerning sex and at slamming their pussies down on male jing-jangs, giving their partners and themselves the sperm-soaked orgasms ;)
Top Posts
Recent Comments
- bryan on Bart & Lisa getting a swift crash course in fuck-a-thon education from Marge,As she drives them to school.
- Hot on Seymour Skinner likes to assist at sex-ed class!
- Random on In this comic, bart peeks into the bathroom to find Marge naked in the shower with her ass, pussy, and boobs all soaped up.
- Marcela on Homer is fucking Lisa in her bed. She's enjoying it and is blushing as her Dad cumes in her tight little pussy…
- gustavo on MARGE KNEW THAT SHE HAD TO HAVE THAT Meaty Spear. IT DID NOT MATTER THAT IT WAS BART. SHE JUST HAD TO HAVE IT. SO THAT NIGHT…


text:
On delivery the frame and the seat of this chair are separate. Assembly is very easy, it's just a case of fixing the frame to the seat using the ready drilled holes and fixings provided.
No tools are needed to complete this assembly and full instructions will be included with your delivery.
If you would rather that this is done for you by our experienced installation teams, just add 'Delivery and Assembly' at checkout and we'll do the work for you.


text:
D´ábel,, oohhhh.
Hugh JackmanShared publicly -
"I am so happy to be home, to be shooting a movie of this magnitude here at home is one of the great privileges I have had in my career." - Hugh on filming "The Wolverine" in Sydney, Australia
253 comments
This wolverine movie is gonna be great! After all, he's the best there is at what he does.
tem vaga para figurante amador la,seria da hora fazer parte
Pravin Gangwar
+Hugh Jackman Will be waiting for this movie :) Please don't let any moron to leak your movie like last time X-Men Origins: Wolverine.
Decater Collins
for all you wolverine fans, marvel's offering a free lunchtime read of wolverine #17 http://marvel.com/comic_books/issue/36469/wolverine_2010_17
Welcome back sir with the most popular and entertaining series of yours. Though we know its gonna be a block buster, still Good luck.
Ok hug you gratitude by good this guy....amazin...........hhhhaaaahahaha...good look bro.......
Is it just me, or does the claws on his/your left hand, look a little bit crooked? :P
Do such movies or create such solidness in your present movies which has affection likes movies directed by your native actor MelGibson--means Brave Heart.That is agressiveness.
Al pelo!!!! espectacular!!!
es una imagen pero se nota la ficcion de la edicion en la compu
photoku jangan di pajang.....
Because Logan is characterized as a Canadian in the comic book universe, we Canucks who are comic fans tend to love the character.
I don't think much was ever captured about what it is like to grow up Canadian in the Comics other than the occasional reference to being 'outdoorsy".
That said, I will look forward to seeing this story told.
I don't think much was ever captured about what it is like to grow up Canadian in the Comics other than the occasional reference to being 'outdoorsy".
That said, I will look forward to seeing this story told.
Once celebrities speak about themselves in the 3rd person they have acquired the 'god complex'
In response to Joaquin Quintana-often celebrities don't post their own comments, but instead have social media management do it for them. Without knowing which is the case for Mr. Jackman, you cannot possibly know if it is actually him speaking about himself in the 3rd person. What's more, it doesn't really matter; and, it's quite a leap to say if he does do so, he has a God complex.
lol +Danielle Chambers it was a joke but I appreciate the drawn out logical conclusion :)
Ok, well there was no context or indication that you were joking. It's nice to know! And you're welcome :)
Glad to have you back here hope that everything goes well in the filming,and I can't wait for its opening and keep up what you are doing,thanks
Larry Novotny
It's great see Wolverine is Back!! Marvel seemed to have lost track of the X-Men franchise concentrating on the Avengers. Looking forward to it as Wolverine is a great, complex character.
I can't wait this is THE BEST marvel hero I like the cpt.America but THIS GUY TOPS ALL he is SO human but NOT he always makes me want more!!!! from comic to TV cartoon then the big screen with real people instead of cartoons what a great time. ALL OF MY childhood favorite things to do NOW in the IMAX 3d
this one better not suck Hugh. I'm still trying to drink the pain away from the last one.
I love your work +Hugh Jackman "..You Are Amazing in x-Men Orgings:Wolverine..your so Hot! Your so talented in everything you do .I will be there on opening night.Looks Amazing I can't wait..Nice pic":) your the perfect guy for this role of wolverine!! Your the Best":)
Seriously, +Bess Gershowitz, the beauty of G+ is that you don't have to listen to it if you don't want to. I personally like my daily Hugh.
There's no place like home. When you travel for work in any capacity, the closer you can be to the place you love the better. And thank you for being my inspiration for going to the gym in the morning.
Imagina quando Jesus voltar como num vai ser entao rsrsrsrsr
Nice Hugh, say hi to my buddy Tony welding on the set.. Can't wait to see the movie.
Looks like you've been scratching your stomach with your claws out bro. Should chill out on that. Might get an itchy neck.
Ohh , that might be great for you. You get to be prophet in your own town. Congratulations. It feels great to. Know that eventhough your fame, you're well grounded. Cariños!
can't wait to see if this is as good, if not better than the first one. I was disappointed by how far the first movie strayed from the comic, but there is hope for this one.
I´m happy that you are filming The Wolverine at last, Hugh! I´ll be waiting to watch this movie next year.
You are an inspiration to others. I love that your family is your driving force. You remind me of someone I lost years ago, my own husband. Your characters are always so interesting and so diverse and I always look forward to what you are going to be in next.
O Wolverine é D+ muito responsa
живая сталь лучше
خیلی خوشتیپی.عاشق بازیاتم
que rech.imba los poderes de este mutante.
Na minha opinião o mais forte dos x-men.
Ez brutálisan jó!
esse filme é o máximooo!! \o/ \o/
Add a comment...


text:
Nancy Borrett BACP Accredited Counsellor / Psychotherapist in Finchley and Chalk Farm, North London
|1st October 2016
Counsellor/Psychotherapist in North London : Registered Member MBACP (Accred)
Welcome to my website.
I am an experienced, accredited counsellor/psychotherapist working from two different North London locations - Finchley N12 and Chalk Farm NW3. My consulting room in Finchley N12 is within easy reach of Whetstone, Barnet and East Finchley. The nearest tube stations are West Finchley (around 12 minutes walk) or Finchley Central (15 minutes walk)- both on the Northern Line- and there are many buses close by. My base at Chalk Farm is a 3 minute walk from the tube station and also close to Camden Town, Belsize Park, Hampstead, Gospel Oak, Primrose Hill and Swiss Cottage.
Finding a counsellor or psychotherapist can feel daunting at a time when you are likely to be feeling vulnerable. So many websites and so much professional jargon! This can be particularly true if you are new to counselling and psychotherapy. I hope that this site will offer some useful basic information, and help you decide whether or not you think meeting with me for an initial meeting could be a helpful first step.
Please phone or email me if you have any additional questions. All telephone conversations and emails are completely confidential and I usually reply within 24 hours.
How I work:
There are many different approaches to counselling and psychotherapy. If you would like to read the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy's brief overview of theoretical approaches, please click here.
My main therapy approach is psychodynamic integrative.
Psychodynamic therapy addresses the conflict between conscious and unconscious feelings, ie those which are known to us and those which are hidden but may nonetheless have a huge impact on our lives. It can be helpful to explore possible connections between early relationships, current relationships and the way you feel about being in sessions (once an alliance has had time to develop).
An integrative approach acknowledges the need for flexibility, ie that there is no single way of working that can encompass the diversity of human experience.
I favour a transparent and collaborative approach, listening to your story and aiming to discuss and agree with you what you hope to gain from sessions. I use ideas and insights from different therapy approaches and work with these flexibly, according to each individual's needs. For example, problems of acute anxiety or post traumatic stress often respond well to ideas from cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) initially, as part of the process of stabilisation (feeling safer and managing overwhelming feelings) before further in-depth therapeutic work can take place. I often integrate stabilisation work into a broader approach when appropriate.
Your personality, cultural background, life experience and reasons for attending sessions will be taken into account.
Much recent research suggests that the quality of the relationship between therapist and client is the most important healing factor, over and above any particular theoretical approach or technique.
Whatever your reasons for seeking help, developing a sound and trusting therapeutic relationship is central to my way of working.
Counselling in Finchley and Chalk Farm, North London, within easy reach of Barnet, Whetstone, East Finchley, Belsize Park, Hampstead, Camden Town, Swiss Cottage and surrounding areas
|email: email@example.com
|07986 559625
|powered by WebHealer


text:
Left Masthead
September 28, 2016
The Forgotten War
Posted on Oct 4, 2006
The U.N. refugee agency says about 200,000 people have been displaced by fighting in southern Afghanistan as NATO forces clash with a re-energized Taliban.
Square, Site wide
New and Improved Comments
If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
Join the conversation
Load Comments
By slg, October 4, 2006 at 11:08 am Link to this comment
This is some of the most disquieting of a whole series of dismal news stories this last week. There's something completely disgusting about strutting American politicians caught in rutting rituals while deciding a foreign Nations fate.
What an image to present to the suffering people of the third world being bombed and beaten into the republican way of life.
Five years in Afghanistan, nearly four in Iraq. Peoples' lives are hell over there because we allowed ourselves to be lead by self serving tyrants who only want to drag the world into chaos.
Where are the true hearted leaders who will encourage and inspire a better world that works, for everyone?