User talk:JacobB

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

For older discussions, see the archives:

July 7 - Nov. 20, 2009,

Nov. 28 - Dec. 31, 2009,

Dec. 31 - Feb. 28, 2010,

Feb. 28 - May 29, 2010

Barry Farber article

The first paragraph is fine, but I noticed that the last 6 paragraphs of the Barry Farber article are identical to the Wikipedia article of the same name, as of June 3, 2010. I'm currently busy with meetings and won't have time to research any changes for almost a week, but I wanted to bring it to your attention since it is a verbatim copy of the article text from Wikipedia, and I believe this sort of behavior should be avoided. If you're the user at Wikipedia who wrote that article, I apologize for the inconvenience, but please state so on the talk page. In Christ, Tyler Zoran Talk 07:28, 4 June 2010 (EDT)

What do you mean--plagiarism? Plagiarism means taking false personal credit for academic gain, which is not at issue here. Nobody is gaining any academic credit for their writing at CP. RJJensen 00:11, 17 January 2010 (EST)
I think you should examine the text in greater detail, Tyler. There are only so many ways to say the same thing, and occasional duplication of phrases can occur, but I don't see they are identical. In any event, something like this should be handled discretely, rather than posted publicly as you did. Your doing so makes me suspect your judgment and goodwill. Dr. Jensen should know a thing or two about writing, and his statement stands as a good hallmark. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 08:11, 4 June 2010 (EDT)
TK is right. Tzoran, you should realize that articles here are a work in progress. When an article is created, it is important that it is presentable. I draw from numerous sources, some of which may draw from Wikipedia. If you ever have a problem with an article, fix it yourself - complaining loudly until other people do your work for you is not an admirable trait. JacobBShout out! 16:28, 4 June 2010 (EDT)

Delete article

When you get a second, think you can delete State sovereignty, national union‎? I put a merge template up, but there really isn't much information to merge ... -- Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 20:17, 8 June 2010 (EDT)

Thanks for the heads up, JLatt, I'll take a look. JacobBShout out! 20:18, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
That was a good call. We're not big fans of uninformative stub articles. JacobBShout out! 20:19, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
Yeah, I try and throw a {{speedy}} or {{delete}} up anytime I see them. Most of them were created by parodists or trolls, anyways. -- Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 20:23, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
Thanks. But just be sure to check to see who created an article before nominating it for deletion.JacobBShout out! 20:27, 8 June 2010 (EDT)

Promoting Multivariable Calculus

I wonder how we cam promote your marvelous course in Multivariable Calculus. Perhaps with a certificate of completion for successful students? Other ideas? --Andy Schlafly 12:43, 19 June 2010 (EDT)

That's not a bad idea, but a certificate is more of a payout - I think the real payout will be when the students take their BC Calculus exams, which would give college credit for Calculus 1 and 2! How we should advertise it to students is a good question - I'll think on his, and I'll get back to you. I know Conservative is good at promoting things, I'll also shoot him an email.
The course is just about ready to go, btw, I just have to re-organize some lectures and add some problems at the end. It's something I keep meaning to do, but it's easy to put on the back burner with summer courses and a full-time job. Maybe I can get it done tomorrow night? Yeah, I think I'll make that my Sunday evening project. JacobBShout out! 14:07, 19 June 2010 (EDT)
Maybe we could set up a track for helping students skip a year of college with AP or CLEP credits, with tips on which colleges accept which credits. Saving a year's tuition can help students enormously.--Andy Schlafly 14:59, 19 June 2010 (EDT)
I'm going to start a new entry outlining how Conaervapedia can help students obtain college degrees for less money, by taking courses here and earning credits with AP or CLEP exams. Our guide can include specific college policies.--Andy Schlafly 00:06, 20 June 2010 (EDT)


==The Nature of Greek and English==


There is no such thing as "the original English." I assume that you just made an accidental slip in writing that in your message to me. I hope that does not mean that you just took the KJV and rewrote it without reading Greek. That would not be a translation at all.

Are you saying that English is more precise than Greek? If so, what leads you to believe that?

How much Greek have you had? Perhaps you are an expert in math and physics. Though I took calculus and physics at Georgia Tech, I am not a major in those areas, and I would be wary of posting articles on those subjects. If Bible and Greek are not your majors, you ought to back off from translating the Bible. Pardon me if indeed you have a graduate degree in Greek.

How do you know that "concepts which are only vaguely expressed in Greek can be made crystal clear in English." If the Lord gave us passages which have studied ambiguity, who are we to change that? Greek is to theology as math is to science. Now don't tell me that concepts which are only vaguely expressed in math can be made crystal clear in English.

My colleague, you are in the process of producing a product which is not a translation at all, and which will bring Conservapedia into ridicule. Students of Greek will disparage the product as the product of uneducated hybris. The only service you can do to readers is to enable them to read God's word accurately, if you know Greek. Of course you could do them a service by giving them something to roll on the floor laughing at, including the entire Conservapedia. But I don't think you want to do that.

I am concerned about a distortion of God's word and also sincerely about your stance regarding translation.

If you are a born-again Christian and know the Lord Jesus as your only and sufficient Savior (no works), then please give my comments prayerful consideration.(Thunkful 15:19, 19 June 2010 (EDT))

I'm discussing this on User talk:Thunkful and will only add here that the claim that "Greek is to theology as math is to science" does not withstand scrutiny. Math is precise. Language is not. Greek lacked many concepts developed in modern English, terminology often developed to better express the original intent of Christ.--Andy Schlafly 00:52, 20 June 2010 (EDT)


Jacob, increasingly I'm hearing that the CLEP exams are the pathway to low-cost college credit. There are 4 CLEP math exams, but no advanced ones. I'm describing them in the CLEP entry. I wonder if there is another exam offered for demonstrating proficiency in multivariable calculus.--Andy Schlafly 11:27, 22 June 2010 (EDT)

Yes, I recently advised somebody (mistakenly) that the multivariate calc course would aid with the Calc BC exam. That's why I'm starting on these Calc I and II courses. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure that there is a college-credit exam for calc III. Which is unfortunate, given the time I put into that, but we can have these calc I and II courses up soon, I hope. JacobBShout out! 20:23, 22 June 2010 (EDT)
The multivariable calculus course can still be a pathway to credit even though the CLEP exams do not yet include this advanced topic. A student could take our multivariable course in conjunction with a low-cost community college course and obtain credit by passing the final exam.--Andy Schlafly 22:12, 22 June 2010 (EDT)
Oh, absolutely! It's a good course and I'm not disparaging my own work at all! JacobBShout out! 22:14, 22 June 2010 (EDT)
More students would take multivariable calculus for credit at low-cost community colleges if they could have some explanatory material on the internet, which your course offers. Some community college students cannot afford to skip work to attend all the classes, but with online material could pass the exams. The Khan Academy also offers supplemental material by video, but I don't find it to be as effective as good textual explanations.--Andy Schlafly 23:26, 22 June 2010 (EDT)

My MV Calc stuff

Please see the bottom of my talk page. SamHB 22:25, 30 June 2010 (EDT)

More of Same


I have been continuing my MV calc work over at Wikiversity, using the "natural vector" as opposed to "unit vector" method—the issue we were arguing about. (Apropos: your "Oh, is that a sig sauer over there? Hand it to me? Great, thanks. *blows brains out*." comment on my talk page.  :-) I'm still trying to do the "natural vector" stuff, though it's pretty daunting, and I may just decide that it wasn't right. So save a bullet for me, OK?

I have cut way back on the overall scope of the project, leaving out the earlier "single variable calculus review" stuff, for example, and leaving out the later stuff about the wave equation and diffusion equation and ODE's and PDE's. We were really going after an incredibly ambitious goal! So it's just 3 lectures, going up to Stokes' theorem. At least, that's the not-yet-attained goal. But the first 2 lectures are in pretty good shape.

There is definitely something appealing about saying that the length of a vector is always the square root of the sum of the squares of its components ("unit vector" method.) I have to admit that. But there is also something appealing about saying that I can choose any coordinate system I want, even if it isn't orthogonal, and the formulas will always work. For example, I give the parametric definition of a helix by making artificial "helical coordinates" in 3 dimensions, and then just holding two coordinates constant to get a 1-dimensional curve. And the arc length along that curve just comes from the 1-dimensional induced metric. That is why I wanted to use "natural" vectors.

Anyway, you might want to have a look. And I'd appreciate any comments you might have.

SamHB 23:53, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

Teaching newbies

Well put. --Ed Poor Talk 17:54, 15 August 2010 (EDT)

Barry Farber

JacobB, hope you're well. Your edits to Barry Farber are being questioned. Could you respond? Thanks.--Andy Schlafly 00:35, 27 November 2010 (EST)

Welcome back

Welcome back, Jacob! It's good to see you online here again.--Andy Schlafly 16:43, 19 June 2011 (EDT)