Talk:Momentum (operator)

From Conservapedia

I fail to see the propaganda or fiction in this article. Granted, it seems out of place here, but everything in it is correct. This is familiar to anyone who has studied quantum mechanics.Penultimate 11:51, 30 January 2008 (EST)

As I said in the edit comment, I have no idea if this is real or not. (Unfortunately the only vandalism tag I could find was the leftist propaganda one, but it's obviously not accurate in this case.) The user who created this page also created many other pages which were complete parody but intended to look real. This one is so dense, and I've not had enough QM, that it's hard for me to tell.

If this isn't vandalism feel free to take off the tag. If you understand it, it would be great if you could take it down a couple of grade levels as well :) HelpJazz 16:25, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Oops; I guess I ought to explain here, rather than in private email to DanH

My recent deletion of material was explained in mail to DanH, after I had been blocked. Why don't I just repeat the mail:

Hi there. I see you have blocked (#24669) the IP address XX.XX.XX.XX. I'm sure you know that IP blocking makes it impossible for people who have to use corporate firewalls to do any editing. I have no idea who "proud2beamerican", or whoever, is. Using the same firewall, I guess.

If you can't unblock this address (5 years seems an awfully long time to block entire companies), please make the following changes to "momentum (operator)": Take off the vandalism tag. It just gives people the impression that CP doesn't understand its own subject matter. Or that it can't find any people who have both the necessary political knowledge or the necessary scientific knowledge to talk about quantum mechanics. Then delete everything after the first equation. That is, from "It might be tempting ...." onward. Leave the category, of course. That first section will be clear to any physics major. No one will be able to complain.

Yeah, I looked at this guy's ("stones") work on the page, and I agree that it was silly. He was making fun of Andy's ideas about complex numbers. Nothing I can do about that. But I believe the page, after removal of the complex number silliness, is legit. But I don't have time to check it in detail just now, and it isn't worth it. Just take it out. No one will mind.

Diogenes 12:23, 2 February 2008 (EST)