Page 3 of 3

Re: Discussion

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:18 pm
by Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN)
I have to say though, if you have read Antigone and are buzzing with Antigone at the point where it describes her decision to bury her brother that really is a poor choice to buzz there given the many lines beforehand of things that aren't remotely from Antigone, plus, you know, it saying this stuff happens at the end of Antigone, when those things are the whole plot of Antigone from pretty close to the beginning of the play onward. Color me unsympathetic.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:43 pm
by ... and the chaos of Mexican modernity
Not that it probably makes much of a difference or to digress too much, but there was a bonus that asked about the Religious Conflict in Europe. The second part had asked about the peasants fighting in 1525 in Germany that had the answer line of Peasants Revolt, but is that not the Peasant's War? I did answer Peasant's War but that was deemed incorrect, I don't remember the entire bonus part of what it was asking for, but isn't the peasant's conflict in England in the 14th Century known as the Peasant's Revolt, and the 16th Century one lead by Muentzer known as the Peasant's War?

Edit: Grammar

Re: Discussion

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:52 pm
by Auks Ran Ova
Lucy Lane wrote:Not that it probably makes much of a difference or to digress too much, but there was a bonus that asked about the Religious Conflict in Europe. The second part had asked about the peasants fighting in 1525 in Germany that had the answer line of Peasants Revolt, but is that not the Peasant's War? I did answer Peasant's War but that was deemed incorrect, I don't remember the entire bonus part of what it was asking for, but isn't the peasant's conflict in England in the 14th Century known as the Peasant's Revolt, and the 16th Century one lead by Muentzer known as the Peasant's War?

Edit: Grammar
You're right; based on the revised set I have, that error was corrected for later sites.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:54 pm
by Ethnic history of the Vilnius region
It's not a matter of what people should do when buzzing. It's a matter of what many players will and, in this case, did do. People negged this question in at least 50% of the rooms at the Georgia Tech site, and those are just the rooms I asked. I think it's perfectly reasonable to see this question and say, "Hey, there's going to be a lot of negging on this question, especially considering that this is a so-called 'novice tournament.'" The number of rooms that negged on this question makes it problematic per se in my view.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 8:25 pm
by grapesmoker
There's no obvious distinction between "revolt" and "war." In that situation I would accept anything that mentioned "peasants."

Re: Discussion

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 9:22 pm
by Matt Weiner
grapesmoker wrote:There's no obvious distinction between "revolt" and "war." In that situation I would accept anything that mentioned "peasants."
There is a distinction in terms of historiography; "Peasants' Revolt" is overwhelmingly used to refer to the British event led by Wat Tyler, and "Peasants' War" is overwhelmingly used to refer to the German event of the 1520s. For the same reason that we distinguish "Invisible Man" from "The Invisible Man" (that things have names, that knowing those names is what you get points for in quizbowl, that you shouldn't be able to effectively give two answers and get credit for either, that the other one could plausibly come up at a tournament of the same difficulty) we need to be judicious in making sure our answer lines are correct here.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 9:47 pm
by DumbJaques
There is a distinction in terms of historiography; "Peasants' Revolt" is overwhelmingly used to refer to the British event led by Wat Tyler, and "Peasants' War" is overwhelmingly used to refer to the German event of the 1520s. For the same reason that we distinguish "Invisible Man" from "The Invisible Man" (that things have names, that knowing those names is what you get points for in quizbowl, that you shouldn't be able to effectively give two answers and get credit for either, that the other one could plausibly come up at a tournament of the same difficulty) we need to be judicious in making sure our answer lines are correct here.
Actually, I have a question about this - I'm fairly certain I happened to be in the minority of people who heard Muenzer's conflict described as the "Peasants' Revolt," and that once got me negged for buzzing with it. I've since taken to just answer "Muenzer's peasant ______," since it's my natural inclination to call it a revolt. Personally, I can't think of any reason you wouldn't accept Muenzer's peasants' revolt (or other specific things, like the German Peasants' revolt), just as I don't think it fits in with the spirit of the game to neg someone for saying Wells's Invisible Man. I think it's clear when you answer with something like this that you aren't meeting the "could receive points if the answer was either conflict" criterion, but I'm curious as to how others interpret the standard.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 9:58 pm
by Cheynem
There was a common link tossup at ACF Fall last year on "peasant revolts." It included clues on Wat Tyler and Munzer. The answer line was:

ANSWER: Peasant Revolts [accept reasonable equivalents, such as Peasant Wars; or Peasant Uprisings; or Popular revolts]

I'm not decrying the tossup's answer line, but it suggests to me that the specific term for these things is a little shady within quizbowl.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:54 am
by grapesmoker
Matt Weiner wrote:
grapesmoker wrote:There's no obvious distinction between "revolt" and "war." In that situation I would accept anything that mentioned "peasants."
There is a distinction in terms of historiography; "Peasants' Revolt" is overwhelmingly used to refer to the British event led by Wat Tyler, and "Peasants' War" is overwhelmingly used to refer to the German event of the 1520s. For the same reason that we distinguish "Invisible Man" from "The Invisible Man" (that things have names, that knowing those names is what you get points for in quizbowl, that you shouldn't be able to effectively give two answers and get credit for either, that the other one could plausibly come up at a tournament of the same difficulty) we need to be judicious in making sure our answer lines are correct here.
That may be true in some historiographic contexts, and maybe more true in English-speaking historiography than otherwise, but there's really no fundamental distinction in terms here. Yes, things have names, blah blah blah, the point is, sometimes names aren't particularly unambiguous and there's no reason to prefer one over the other. Books have proper names whereas lots of historical events don't have names that are properly assigned but are rather colloquial. I'm very unconcerned about the possibility that someone could get points for meaning "Wat Tyler's rebellion" when the answer is "Peasants' War;" it just doesn't seem all that likely to me.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 11:30 am
by Skepticism and Animal Feed
I know that in German, it's definitely the Peasants War, rather than revolt. They use the word krieg. (Though I think it can also be translated as Farmer's War?) I confess I don't know what word the Germans use to describe the Wat Tyler revolt.

In the past I've required "Peasant's War" and included "do not accept Peasant's Revolt", which I think is notable because I am usually very permissive with answer lines and like to think of myself as an ideological leader of the "eh, take it, that should be acceptable" school.

Accepting "Peasant's Revolt" for "Peasant's War" is different than using Peasant's War clues in a common-link tossup on peasant revolts. The Peasant's War is, after all, a specific peasant revolt.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 11:32 am
by Mechanical Beasts
grapesmoker wrote: That may be true in some historiographic contexts, and maybe more true in English-speaking historiography than otherwise, but there's really no fundamental distinction in terms here. Yes, things have names, blah blah blah, the point is, sometimes names aren't particularly unambiguous and there's no reason to prefer one over the other. Books have proper names whereas lots of historical events don't have names that are properly assigned but are rather colloquial. I'm very unconcerned about the possibility that someone could get points for meaning "Wat Tyler's rebellion" when the answer is "Peasants' War;" it just doesn't seem all that likely to me.
Yeah, we're pretty comfortable allowing people to say "John Adams" even though hypothetically our second president could also have been a modernist composer still alive today, just as much as Wat Tyler could have been in Germany doing, I don't know, things German people do. It's obviously somewhat easier to say "John Adams from history and John Adams from music are comfortably enough different" than "this Peasant's [event] from England and from Germany are comfortably enough different" but if there's a bright line distinction to be drawn, I can't really see putting those two cases on different sides.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:56 pm
by Auks Ran Ova
Morraine Man wrote:I know that in German, it's definitely the Peasants War, rather than revolt. They use the word krieg. (Though I think it can also be translated as Farmer's War?) I confess I don't know what word the Germans use to describe the Wat Tyler revolt.
In German it's the "Deutscher Bauernkrieg"; as Bruce notes, "krieg" is definitely war, and "Bauern" means "farmers" but can also be referred to peasants, yokels, or any other type of country person. Interestingly, Wat Tyler's revolt seems to simply be called the Peasants' Revolt. (Naturally, German Wikipedia must be taken mit einem Körnchen Salz.)

Re: Discussion

Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 12:48 pm
by sds
Would someone mind posting the text of the "stress" tossup?

The discussion of applications in cardiology in the leadin was pretty interesting. However, all of our cardio lectures only ever discussed pressure in those contexts (including with LaPlace's law), so I'd be interested to see what exactly makes the question specific to stress at that point.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:25 pm
by Sima Guang Hater
sds wrote:Would someone mind posting the text of the "stress" tossup?

The discussion of applications in cardiology in the leadin was pretty interesting. However, all of our cardio lectures only ever discussed pressure in those contexts (including with LaPlace's law), so I'd be interested to see what exactly makes the question specific to stress at that point.
You've taken cardio already?

In cardiology, the value of this parameter increases with radius and decreases with wall thickness according to Laplace’s Law. Knowing three vectors for this quantity in mutually perpendicular planes at a point allows for it to be calculated for any plane through that point according to Cauchy’s theorem. Cauchy also lends his name to the second-order tensor used to represent this quantity(*), which has the normal ones on the diagonal and the shear ones off the diagonal. This value can be represented by Lame’s ellipsoid but more commonly the normal and shear components are plotted against each other to find Mohr’s circles. When this value passes the yield point, deformation occurs, and the ratio of it to strain is given by Young’s modulus. Like pressure, it is represented as force per unit area. For 10 points, name this measure of the intensity of forces acting on a deformable, solid body.
ANSWER: stress (accept tension due to ambiguities)

We were taught Laplace's law as (wall stress or tension) = pressure*radius/(wall thickness)

Re: Discussion

Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 11:01 pm
by sds
Looks like I misinterpreted the leadin; this is in fact consistent with my lecture notes, they just always present the Laplace equation in a form solving for pressure.

Michigan's med school does things by organ system, with emphasis on normal function the first year, and then revisiting everything to look at dysfunction during second year. I'm not actually sure if that's the usual way of doing it.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:00 am
by Auroni
The Quest for the Historical Mukherjesus wrote:
sds wrote:Would someone mind posting the text of the "stress" tossup?

The discussion of applications in cardiology in the leadin was pretty interesting. However, all of our cardio lectures only ever discussed pressure in those contexts (including with LaPlace's law), so I'd be interested to see what exactly makes the question specific to stress at that point.
You've taken cardio already?

In cardiology, the value of this parameter increases with radius and decreases with wall thickness according to Laplace’s Law. Knowing three vectors for this quantity in mutually perpendicular planes at a point allows for it to be calculated for any plane through that point according to Cauchy’s theorem. Cauchy also lends his name to the second-order tensor used to represent this quantity(*), which has the normal ones on the diagonal and the shear ones off the diagonal. This value can be represented by Lame’s ellipsoid but more commonly the normal and shear components are plotted against each other to find Mohr’s circles. When this value passes the yield point, deformation occurs, and the ratio of it to strain is given by Young’s modulus. Like pressure, it is represented as force per unit area. For 10 points, name this measure of the intensity of forces acting on a deformable, solid body.
ANSWER: stress (accept tension due to ambiguities)

We were taught Laplace's law as (wall stress or tension) = pressure*radius/(wall thickness)
We learned literally every clue in this tossup in my Bioengineering-Continuum Mechanics class. This was a fantastic tossup, thanks for writing it.

Re: Discussion

Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 4:34 pm
by Adventure Temple Trail
Will this set be posted now that all mirrors are over?

EDIT: It has been posted! Yay!

Re: Discussion

Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2010 5:41 pm
by Duncan Idaho
This is a minor error, but bonus 9 in packet 14 should list Edward Ferrars as the brother of Fanny, not her sister.