User:Guy vandegrift/My welcome message has been moved to a user subpage

Original welcome message has been moved here

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Guy vandegrift!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 20:17, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Archived 18 Sep 2015

Replied to your question

See Commons:Village pump/Copyright#A question about contributing the work of students in my class. for my reply. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 00:51, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

A physics question about compton scattering images

My replacement for what appeared on wikipedia:Heisenberg microscope

.

Currently on wikipedia:Compton scattering. Note the 90 degree angle between the scattered particles.

Currently on wikipedia:Uncertainty principle

Hello all,

It all began with an image I can't seem to post here because it is not on commons. But this image once appeared on the Wikipedia article Heisenberg microscope. I decided to improve it, and after a few iterations settled on the image to the left. By depicting the wavefronts passing through the microscope a discerning reader will be reminded of diffraction.

One unresolved questions is whether the outgoing photon and scattered electron (originally at rest) have directions that are 90 degrees apart. A secondary question is whether the heisenberg microscope optimally operates with the incoming light parallel or perpendicular to the optical axis. The article wikipedia:Uncertainty principle depicts the (illuminating) photon as being perpendicular to the optical axis, something I do not consider a serious flaw since the image is intended to vaguely convey the fact that photons scatter electrons when they interact. But the article wikipedia:Heisenberg microscope should attempt to get this right.

However, I do consider it a flaw to portray Compton scattering with a stationary electron with scattered photon as being perpendicular to the scattered electron because my recollection is that this only occurs when both particles are identical.

If we draw it at 90 degrees, some readers will be left with the impression that it is 90 degrees.

My problem is that while I can find no evidence that the sum of these Compton-scatter angles equals 90 degrees, I have yet to find an article that clearly states that it is NOT 90 degrees. This has two consequences:

1. I might be wrong in depicting it other than 90 degrees.
2. Even if I am right, I have no reference to verify that.

Can anybody help me sort this out? --Guy vandegrift (talk) 17:11, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

You asked me did I have an insight here? Sorry, no I don't. But perhaps the following, though not to the point of your present investigation, might or might not be of interest.

"Klein's recollections confirm that the Heisenberg-Bohr clash over the uncertainty paper followed not so much from philosophical disagreement, “it was more the technical point that Heisenberg did not discuss these experiments correctly” (Bohr 1928a, 572-73). Besides, the analysis of Compton recoil applies rigorously to free and not to the bound electrons - Bohr must have argued this point aggressively enough to force Heisenberg to concede it explicitly, in a postscript to his uncertainty paper (Heisenberg 1927). ... They argued this point until Heisenberg, desperate at his inability to counter Bohr's correct arguments, burst into tears: “I did not know exactly what to say to Bohr's argument to begin with and so the discussion ended with the general impression that now Bohr again has shown that my interpretation is not correct.”"

There is more there, but I fear copyright breach if I copy more here. Likely this is of no use, but perhaps it might be of interest?Chjoaygame (talk) 12:34, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

You have an amazing knowledge of the history of physics and a gift for explaining it in a few words. Regarding the figure, w:User:Cuzkatzimhut's response has me confident that my memory was correct about the Compton-scatter angle. Unfortunately File:Compton-scattering.svg is somehow corrupted and cannot be edited by me as an svg file, so it will stay until someone else wants to redraw it from scratch.

Thanks for responding. I can now move onto another wiki project...after I put a comment on File:Compton-scattering.svg that is likely to be ignored because we are all to busy to sweat the little things on Wikipedia --Guy vandegrift (talk) 14:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Retraction of effort to have alternate account under "Guy vandegrift's student"

This is to verify that I was the one who established the user account "Guy vandegrift's student" and that I do indeed want the page removed. Sorry for the inconvenience.--Guy vandegrift (talk) 23:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Wkiversity:User talk:Kinsey127

Commons:Deletion requests/Wkiversity:User talk:Kinsey127 has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this project page, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Guy vandegrift (talk) 19:03, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

About speedy delete

I think I understand it. For my purposes, the justification for speedy delete will almost always be that found on

• Commons:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#General_reasons:

Original author or uploader requests deletion of recently created (<7 days) unused content. Author/uploader requests for deletion of content that is older or in use should instead be filed at the Deletion Requests page.