Proper time and rigidity in accelerated frames of reference

1964 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 1576-1583 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. E. Romain
1979 ◽  
Vol 152 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 442-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Troost ◽  
H. Van Dam

2017 ◽  
pp. 129-152
Author(s):  
Klaus Lüders ◽  
Robert O. Pohl

1984 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 275-278
Author(s):  
Paul V Halstead ◽  
Gareth T James

2003 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 4-5
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
James B. Talmage

Abstract Permanent impairment cannot be assessed until the patient is at maximum medical improvement (MMI), but the proper time to test following carpal tunnel release often is not clear. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) states: “Factors affecting nerve recovery in compression lesions include nerve fiber pathology, level of injury, duration of injury, and status of end organs,” but age is not prognostic. The AMA Guides clarifies: “High axonotmesis lesions may take 1 to 2 years for maximum recovery, whereas even lesions at the wrist may take 6 to 9 months for maximal recovery of nerve function.” The authors review 3 studies that followed patients’ long-term recovery of hand function after open carpal tunnel release surgery and found that estimates of MMI ranged from 25 weeks to 24 months (for “significant improvement”) to 18 to 24 months. The authors suggest that if the early results of surgery suggest a patient's improvement in the activities of daily living (ADL) and an examination shows few or no symptoms, the result can be assessed early. If major symptoms and ADL problems persist, the examiner should wait at least 6 to 12 months, until symptoms appear to stop improving. A patient with carpal tunnel syndrome who declines a release can be rated for impairment, and, as appropriate, the physician may wish to make a written note of this in the medical evaluation report.


1989 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-203
Author(s):  
No authorship indicated
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Liliane Campos

By decentring our reading of Hamlet, Stoppard’s tragicomedy questions the legitimacy of centres and of stable frames of reference. So Liliane Campos examines how Stoppard plays with the physical and cosmological models he finds in Hamlet, particularly those of the wheel and the compass, and gives a new scientific depth to the fear that time is ‘out of joint’. In both his play and his own film adaptation, Stoppard’s rewriting gives a 20th-century twist to these metaphors, through references to relativity, indeterminacy, and the role of the observer. When they refer to the uncontrollable wheels of their fate, his characters no longer describe the destruction of order, but uncertainty about which order is at work, whether heliocentric or geocentric, random or tragic. When they express their loss of bearings, they do so through the thought experiments of modern physics, from Galilean relativity to quantum uncertainty, drawing our attention to shifting frames of reference. Much like Schrödinger’s cat, Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are both dead and alive. As we observe their predicament, Campos argues, we are placed in the paradoxical position of the observer in 20th-century physics, and constantly reminded that our time-specific relation to the canon inevitably determines our interpretation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document