deletions | additions       diff --git a/section_Introduction_subsection_Johnson_Noise__.tex b/section_Introduction_subsection_Johnson_Noise__.tex  index e619427..e0efa14 100644  --- a/section_Introduction_subsection_Johnson_Noise__.tex  +++ b/section_Introduction_subsection_Johnson_Noise__.tex 
...
Therefore, larger resistances would generate more noise because the electrons carry more energy (??? not true!) and in turn create a higher fluctuation in voltage. In order to understand Johnson Noise, imagine that a resistor is filled with electrons. At anytime the electrons are bouncing off or scattering off each other. This means that at any given time, there will be an imbalance of electrons from one side of the resistor to the other. This imbalance of electrons results in a difference of electric potential across the resistor, which is noise.   Reference: http://web.mit.edu/dvp/Public/noise-paper.pdf  \textbf{Note: I think you may have misunderstood my reminder that you need to provide references and citations in your papers. You don't actually seem to have made use of this reference here, so you shouldn't cite it. I certainly can't find anywhere in that report where it claims that It certainly isn't the source of your (false) assertion that electons carry more energy if they are in a resistor with a higher resistance. In high school, you may have been asked to use Google to find and list 3 - 5 additional references with titles that happen to be on your topic even if you didn't actually use them , but in a scientific paper, the reason to cite a reference is because it provided information of use to your experimental design or analysis, or because you are reporting results that refer back to the original measurements and analysis. So you might refer to the TeachSpin manual in your methods and analysis sections (and description of the experimental apparatus) and you might refer to the original papers by Johnson and Nyquist on Johnson Noise, but you shouldn't cite an unpublished undergraduate research lab report with results that are worse than yours as the source of your explanation of Johnson noise, when you don't actually make use of that reports explanation and it doesn't actually support your claims. }