User talk:AnInformedDude

A belated welcome![edit]

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, AnInformedDude. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Sam Sailor ^Sing 03:08, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is an initial post.

Reply on talk page of multi-index notation[edit]

I have left a reply to a message of yours on the talk page of multi-index notation. Quietbritishjim (talk) 17:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tonometry calculations[edit]

As each method is different, the calculations required will depend on the mechanism. There are some studies which compare methods to the gold standard which is an intracameral (in the eye) pressure transducer. These studes are normally performed during cataract surgery when you're already inserting instuments in to the eye. I'm pretty sure there is an ISO standard but don't know the number. For Goldmann tonometry (the clinical gold standard), you would need to consult the original paper from the 1950s. Briefly, Goldmann contented that when an area of 3.05mm was flattened, then the meniscal forces of the tear film were equivalent to those of corneal rigidity (cancelling each other out) so that the pressure could be inferred by the force applied from a calibrated adjustable tension spring. Current Goldmann tonometers all have a calibration bar that can be used to check the forces they apply. Hope thats helpful.Nernst (talk) 21:42, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013[edit]

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Iron(II) phosphate. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. This diff[1] Sam Sailor ^Sing 03:09, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Sam Sailor from AnInformedDude[edit]

Hi there, thanks for your message. I was merely pointing out that Iron (II) phosphate and Iron (III) phosphate ought to have different colours due to the differing oxidation states of the Iron atoms that comprise their molecules. I did not, however, mention either the correct colours for the relevant chemical compounds, nor a specific source which vindicates the colours of these two compounds under "standard conditions". Of course, someone with chemistry knowledge ought to be able to point out what the colours are. Further comments about the appearance of the crystal or other granular structures of the compound would be a good idea. I may bring this to your attention on your page. AnInformedDude (talk) 03:21, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dude. Mentioning my name with the user prefix echoes. Why not raise the question on Talk:Iron(II) phosphate? And/or on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry? Best, Sam Sailor ^Sing 07:12, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Universal Numbering SystemColourCoded.svg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Universal Numbering SystemColourCoded.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:07, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Project PACER[edit]

Talk page comment that you may be able to answer Boundarylayer (talk) 14:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]