Datasets:
Gustav0-Freind
/
100m

Dataset card Data Studio Files Community
1
text
stringlengths
1
5.12k
"
" Simms turned pro at the age of 26 and stopped his first seven opponents. Although he was undefeated for twelve years and rarely got hit due to his defensive skills, he saw limited action due to promotional difficulties. In 2005, he fought to a highly controversial draw in the hometown of Robert Frazier at the Turning Stone Casino in May, 2005. Following a two-year layoff, Simms won five straight fights before losing for the first time in late 2009 to title contender Allan Green by decision. Simms accepted the bout against Green on eight days' notice. After the close loss to Green, a bout which some ringsiders scored a draw, Simms signed with advisor Matt Yanofsky and inked a promotional deal with New Jersey–based Main Events. He won two consecutive bouts heading into 2012, with his eye on another significant fight.
"
"
"
"= = = Kids' meal = = =
"
"
"
" The kids' meal or children's meal is a fast food combination meal tailored to and marketed to children. Most kids' meals come in colourful bags or cardboard boxes with depictions of activities on the bag or box and a plastic toy inside. Most standard kids' meals comprise a burger or chicken nuggets, a side item, and a soft drink.
"
" The first kids' meal, Funmeal, emerged at Burger Chef in 1973 and succeeded. Discerning the popularity of the kids' meal, McDonald's introduced its Happy Meal in 1978, and other fast food corporations, including Burger King, followed suit with their own kids' meals.
"
" Some fast food corporations considered youngsters their ""most important"" customers, owing to the success of the kids' meal. Their effectiveness has been ascribed to the fact that the patronage of youngsters often means the patronage of a family and to the allure of the toys, which often are in collectable series. In 2006, $360 million of the expenditures of fast food corporations was for toys in kids' meals, which numbered over 1.2 billion.
"
" In recent years, the popularity of the kids' meal has receded, with a study by NPD Group indicating that there was a 6% decrease in kids' meals sales in 2011. Explanations include parents' realization that kids' meals are unhealthy, parents' desire to save money (opting instead to order from the value menu), as well as kids' outgrowing the meals earlier than before. Youngsters have ""become more sophisticated in their palates"" and seek items from the regular menu but in smaller servings. Kids' meal toys are also no longer appealing to the increasingly technology-oriented youth, who prefer video games. Also, the kids meal toys of Wendy's and Chick-Fil-A are no longer appealing to ages 8–12.
"
" Kids' meals have evolved in response to critics, offering healthier selections and greater variety. In 2011, nineteen food chains participating in the Kids Live Well initiative—including Burger King, Denny's, IHOP, Chili's, Friendly's, Chevy's, and El Pollo Loco—pledged to ""offer at least one children's meal that has fewer than 600 calories, no soft drinks and at least two items from the following food groups: fruits, vegetables, whole grains, lean proteins or low-fat dairy"".
"
" There have been concerns from food critics about the nutritional value of the kids' meal. A 2010 study by the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity inspecting the kids' meals of twelve US food chains concluded that of 3,039 entrée combinations, twelve satisfied the advised levels of fat, sodium, and calories for preschool kids and fifteen those for older kids.
"
" Burger King has run kids meal promotions featuring toys of characters from PG-13 films at least three times, such as ""Small Soldiers"" in 1998, """" in 2005, and the Simpsons movie in 2007,
"
" One of the McDonald's toys featuring ""Minions"" characters in 2015 has caused controversy because parents have confused the gibberish talking minion with profanity. This was said to have taught young children an invalid language. As a result, the minion toys promotion was ended early, in July 2015.
"
" In the United States, kids' meals have been blamed for ingraining unhealthy dietary habits in youngsters and augmenting child obesity. In 2010, Santa Clara County, California implemented a ban on toys accompanying kids' meals that fail nutritional standards; affected restaurants showed a 2.8- to 3.4-fold improvement in Children's Menu Assessment scores from pre- to post-ordinance (e.g., improvements in on-site nutritional guidance; promotion of healthy meals, beverages, and side items; and toy marketing and distribution activities) with minimal changes at unaffected restaurants. San Francisco County enacted the same ban, and similar ones have been proposed or considered in other cities or states across the country. Research that examined the impact of the San Francisco ban indicated that both affected restaurant chains responded to the ordinance by selling toys separately from children’s meals, but neither changed their menus to meet ordinance-specified nutrition criteria. Conversely, legislators in Arizona prohibited such restrictions, and Florida state senators proposed the same.
"
" Outside the United States, Spain and Brazil have also considered such measures. Chile has banned toys in kids' meals altogether.
"
"
"
"= = = Priest of Love = = =
"
"
"
" Priest of Love is a biographical film about D. H. Lawrence and his wife Frieda (née Von Richthofen). It was produced and directed by Christopher Miles and co-produced by Andrew Donally. The screenplay was by Alan Plater from the biography ""A Priest of Love"" by Harry T. Moore. The music score was by Francis James Brown and Stanley Joseph Seeger, credited jointly as ""Joseph James"", and the cinematography was by Ted Moore.
"
" The film was first released by Filmways in New York on 11 October 1981 and then by Enterprise Pictures Ltd in London with a Royal Premiere on 18 February 1982.
"
" Subsequently, the film was re-cut in 1985 by the director, for the centenary of D.H.Lawrence’s birth, and was re-released in cinemas by Enterprise Pictures to greater commercial and critical success.
"
" This 1985 Centenary Version was then re-mastered in 2011 for a new DVD release in the United States (Kino International – standard DVD and Blu-ray) and in the UK (Odeon Entertainment – standard DVD - 2012). The extras on both DVDs include interviews with Ian McKellen and Christopher Miles, and Penelope Keith narrates ‘The way we got it together’ on the making of the film.
"
"
"
"= = = Memorial Day Miracle = = =
"
"
"
" The Memorial Day Miracle is a game-winning three-point field goal by Sean Elliott in Game 2 of the 1999 Western Conference Finals between the Portland Trail Blazers and the San Antonio Spurs at the Alamodome in San Antonio, Texas on May 31, 1999, Memorial Day.
"
" Damon Stoudamire of the Blazers was fouled with 12 seconds left in the fourth quarter. He hit one of two free throws to make the Blazers' lead 85–83. The Spurs called a timeout to advance the ball to half-court. After the timeout, Spurs guard Mario Elie inbounded the ball past a diving Augmon to forward Sean Elliott.
"
" Elliott caught the inbounds pass near the sideline. He stayed on his toes while turning to shoot a three-pointer, careful not to set his heels down out of bounds which would have caused a turnover. With Rasheed Wallace running at him trying to block the shot, Elliott arched the ball over Wallace's outstretched hand and into the basket with nine seconds left to give the Spurs an 86–85 lead. Portland failed to score in the remaining time, and the Spurs, who had trailed for the entire game prior to Elliott's basket, celebrated on the court.
"
" The ""Miracle"" designation relates to the combination of circumstances involved:
"
" The Spurs won the next two in Portland for a four-game sweep, then defeated the New York Knicks in the 1999 NBA Finals 4 games to 1 to win their first NBA Title.
"
"
"
"= = = Quantum nonlocality = = =
"
"
"
" In theoretical physics, quantum nonlocality refers to the phenomenon by which the measurement statistics of a multipartite quantum system do not admit an interpretation in terms of a local realistic theory. Quantum nonlocality has been experimentally verified under different physical assumptions. Any physical theory that aims at superseding or replacing quantum theory should account for such experiments and therefore must also be nonlocal in this sense; quantum nonlocality is a property of the universe that is independent of our description of nature.
"
" Quantum nonlocality does not allow for faster-than-light communication, and hence is compatible with special relativity. However, it prompts many of the foundational discussions concerning quantum theory, see Quantum foundations.
"
" In 1935, Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen published a thought experiment with which they hoped to expose the incompleteness of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics in relation to the violation of local causality at the microscopic scale that it described. Afterwards, Einstein presented a variant of these ideas in a letter to Erwin Schrödinger, which is the version that is presented here. The state and notation used here are more modern, and akin to Bohm's take on EPR. The quantum state of the two particles prior to measurement can be written as
"
" where formula_2.
"
" Here, subscripts “A” and “B” distinguish the two particles, though it is more convenient and usual to refer to these particles as being in the possession of two experimentalists called Alice and Bob. The rules of quantum theory give predictions for the outcomes of measurements performed by the experimentalists. Alice, for example, will measure her particle to be spin-up in an average of fifty percent of measurements. However, according to the Copenhagen interpretation, Alice's measurement causes the state of the two particles to collapse, so that if Alice performs a measurement of spin in the z-direction, that is with respect to the basis formula_3, then Bob's system will be left in one of the states formula_4. Likewise, if Alice performs a measurement of spin in the x-direction, that is, with respect to the basis formula_5, then Bob's system will be left in one of the states formula_6. Schrödinger referred to this phenomenon as ""steering"". This steering occurs in such a way that no signal can be sent by performing such a state update; quantum nonlocality cannot be used to send messages instantaneously and is therefore not in direct conflict with causality concerns in Special Relativity.
"
" In the Copenhagen view of this experiment, Alice's measurement—and particularly her measurement choice—has a direct effect on Bob's state. However, under the assumption of locality, actions on Alice's system do not affect the ""true"", or ""ontic"" state of Bob's system. We see that the ontic state of Bob's system must be compatible with one of the quantum states formula_7 or formula_8, since Alice can make a measurement that concludes with one of those states being the quantum description of his system. At the same time, it must also be compatible with one of the quantum states formula_9 or formula_10 for the same reason. Therefore, the ontic state of Bob's system must be compatible with at least two quantum states; the quantum state is therefore not a complete descriptor of his system. Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen saw this as evidence of the incompleteness of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory, since the wavefunction is explicitly not a complete description of a quantum system under this assumption of locality. Their paper concludes:
"
" Although various authors (most notably Niels Bohr) criticised the ambiguous terminology of the EPR paper, the thought experiment nevertheless generated a great deal of interest. Their notion of a ""complete description"" was later formalised by the suggestion of hidden variables that determine the statistics of measurement results, but to which an observer does not have access. Bohmian mechanics provides such a completion of quantum mechanics, with the introduction of hidden variables; however the theory is explicitly nonlocal. The interpretation therefore does not give an answer to Einstein's question, which was whether or not a complete description of quantum mechanics could be given in terms of local hidden variables in keeping with the ""Principle of Local Action"".
"
" In 1964 John Bell answered Einstein's question by showing that such local hidden variables can never reproduce the full range of statistical outcomes predicted by quantum theory. Bell showed that a local hidden variable hypothesis leads to restrictions on the strength of correlations of measurement results. If the Bell inequalities are violated experimentally as predicted by quantum mechanics, then reality cannot be described by local hidden variables and the mystery of quantum nonlocal causation remains. According to Bell:
"
" Clauser, Horne, Shimony and Holt (CHSH) reformulated these inequalities in a manner that was more conductive to experimental testing (see CHSH inequality).
"
" In the scenario proposed by Bell (a Bell scenario), two experimentalists, Alice and Bob, conduct experiments in separate labs. At each run, Alice (Bob) conducts an experiment formula_11 formula_12 in her (his) lab, obtaining outcome formula_13 formula_14. If Alice and Bob repeat their experiments several times, then they can estimate the probabilities formula_15, namely, the probability that Alice and Bob respectively observe the results formula_16 when they respectively conduct the experiments x,y. In the following, each such set of probabilities formula_17 will be denoted by just formula_15. In the quantum nonlocality slang, formula_15 is termed a box.
"
" Bell formalized the idea of a hidden variable by introducing the parameter formula_20 to locally characterize measurement results on each system: ""It is a matter of indifference ... whether λ denotes a single variable or a set ... and whether the variables are discrete or continuous"". However, it is equivalent (and more intuitive) to think of formula_20 as a local ""strategy"" or ""message"" that occurs with some probability formula_22 when Alice and Bob reboot their experimental setup. EPR's criteria of local separability then stipulates that each local strategy defines the distributions of independent outcomes if Alice conducts experiment x and Bob conducts experiment formula_23:
"
" Here formula_25 (formula_26) denotes the probability that Alice (Bob) obtains the result formula_13 formula_28 when she (he) conducts experiment formula_29 formula_12 and the local variable describing her (his) experiment has value formula_31 (formula_32).
"
" Suppose that formula_33 can take values from some set formula_34. If each pair of values formula_35 has an associated probability formula_36 of being selected (shared randomness is allowed, i.e., formula_33 can be correlated), then one can average over this distribution to obtain a formula for the joint probability of each measurement result:
"
" A box admitting such a decomposition is called a Bell local or a classical box. Fixing the number of possible values which formula_39 can each take, one can represent each box formula_15 as a finite vector with entries formula_41. In that representation, the set of all classical boxes forms a convex polytope.
"
" In the Bell scenario studied by CHSH, where formula_39 can take values within formula_43, any Bell local box formula_44 must satisfy the CHSH inequality:
"
" where
"
" The above considerations apply to model a quantum experiment. Consider two parties conducting local polarization measurements on a bipartite photonic state. The measurement result for the polarization of a photon can take one of two values (informally, whether the photon is polarized in that direction, or in the orthogonal direction). If each party is allowed to choose between just two different polarization directions, the experiment fits within the CHSH scenario. As noted by CHSH, there exist a quantum state and polarization directions which generate a box formula_44 with formula_48 equal to formula_49. This demonstrates an explicit way in which a theory with ontological states that are local, with local measurements and only local actions cannot match the probabilistic predictions of quantum theory, disproving Einstein's hypothesis. Experimentalists such as Alain Aspect have verified the quantum violation of the CHSH inequality as well as other formulations of Bell's inequality, to invalidate the local hidden variables hypothesis and confirm that reality is indeed nonlocal in the EPR sense.
"
" The demonstration of nonlocality due to Bell is probabilistic in the sense that it shows that the precise probabilities predicted by quantum mechanics for some entangled scenarios cannot be met by a local theory. (For short, here and henceforth ""local theory"" means ""local hidden variables theory"".) However, quantum mechanics permits an even stronger violation of local theories: a possibilistic one, in which local theories cannot even agree with quantum mechanics on which events are possible or impossible in an entangled scenario. The first proof of this kind was due to Greenberger, Horne and Zeilinger in 1993