Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 June 16

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 16

Football (soccer) boots

What is the difference between firm ground and soft ground boots? It seems pretty logical, I know, but firm ground boots also have studs which I don't think would be very good for playing on concrete for example. So what exactly is the difference between these two types? --212.120.247.132 (talk) 03:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Well i'm guessing this is another way of differentiating between moulded-studs and screw-in studs? If so then the difference I found is that moulded studs give slightly less grip in anything but perfect conditions, but that normal studs are less effective in really dry/hard-soil because they don't dig in as well and so you get less grip. All original research but throughout my life as a football-mad-child (now man) I have always preferred 'proper' football boots compared to moulded ones. Also you can often get away with moulded-boots on Astro-turf pitches, but can't wear proper studs on them (at least not in the leagues I play in). 194.221.133.226 (talk) 08:34, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

These days, boots with moulded studs, often referred to in the UK as "blades", and best for hard surfaces like astroturf are commonly used by professional players playing on grass, even when it's soft underfoot. It usually prompts grizzled commentators on TV and radio to moan about the player's choice of footwear when he slides over conceeding/missing a vital opportunity. On concrete, I think most people would opt for regular trainers ("sneakers", I think?) with decent treads, rather than any kind of studs. --Dweller (talk) 20:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Yacht without a ladder

I'm working on a novel in which the climax takes place on board a yacht, or at least I would like it to. My protagonist, Denise, is persuaded by the antagonist (let's call her BG for Bad Guy) to go for a swim in the ocean. At some point, either because BG pulls back or cuts the rope ladder or there never was a rope ladder in the first place, Denise realizes there's no way for her to get back on board the yacht. They're too far out for Denise to swim to shore, as BG's intention all along was to leave her to drown. My question is: how can Denise survive this? If possible, I'd like her to have some sort of underwater struggle and get back onboard the yacht. - Aletheia James—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.139.75 (talk) 04:23, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

How about if BG brings the boat back to run her over and finish her, but she dives underwater, grabs some big pieces of seaweed, wraps them around the prop, and thus causes it to seize up ? Then she climbs up the prop and outboard engine into the boat. StuRat (talk) 04:42, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Older yachts had an overhanging stern, hard to climb up or mount an outboard on. Modern yachts sometimes have a square transom with an outboard and ladder, others have a well: very easy to get into. Even motor boats with a square transom and inboard engine often have a couple of projecting trim tabs you could grab and clamber up. I like the seaweed though, more inventive and dramatic. For the movie I'm sure they would substitute her bikini top... Mhicaoidh (talk) 05:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmm . . . not a bad idea. Denise might be clinging to the fragment of the rope ladder, if BG cuts it off while she's trying to climb back up, so maybe she could use that too. I think I'll have to find someone who actually owns a yacht who can give me a little tour and show me what exactly would or wouldn't be climbable, but I'll definitely consider that stopping-the-propeller-from-under-the-boat idea. Oh yeah - brownie points to Mhicaoidh for thinkin' I'll get a movie deal!  :) - Aletheia James —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.139.75 (talk) 05:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

This is actually a well known urban marine (?) story based on several occurrences of finding empty yachts drifting with bloody scratches all around the hull caused by the panicking swimmers as they desperately try to get back on board. So that goes to show that it is indeed very hard to get back on board a sailing boat when there is no ladder. I assume your boat is not at anchor as that would just be too easy. It cannot really be under way either as Denise would be left behind in a matter of second (in this case she would have to grab something as she falls but still holding on to a rope while in the water and the boat under way is just impossible - try it). Anyway, so the boat must be stopped but not at anchor. I'm sorry I have to dismiss the 'use the propeller as a first step to go back on board' as this is too unrealistic. If you swim by even a small 30 feet sailboat, you will hardly be able to touch the prop with the tip of your toes without having your head under the water. This said there are various 'classic' ways she might be able to get back on board. First at various places on the hull she will find evacuation holes, for grey water, for the engine cooling system, for water evacuation from the anchor pit etc. These would be very hard to use to get back on board but she might break a few nails trying it. Now any rope that might be hanging from the boat can be used to haul herself up. The thing is that any noise she would make would spread through the hull and the assailant would hear it. One solution could be to have the sails flapping in the wind (very noisy). This would inevitably send part of the forward sails rope into the water, at about mid point between the sail and the cockpit. As she grabs it it would pull the sail closer to the wind which would fill it and pull her enough to give her additional help getting back on board. I'm afraid these are not very original ideas but definitely realistic. I think if you are serious about your book you should definitely research this yourself by asking a boat owner to take you for a try out at sea. Or you could rent one with a skipper for a day, or even just an afternoon. My two cents, and good luck with the book. 200.127.59.151 (talk) 18:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Bah humbug. What kind of story is that? BG and G meet up on yatch. BG decides to kill G. Not entirely original here in the idea department either. Then the most cliche thing BG and G go swimming BG cuts ladder or rope. What kind of story is this? Yeah you'll probably get a movie deal because they like cliche like this. Why don't you look at your story again and think of a more original idea? I'm just saying your idea needs a little work.

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 20:00, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

... --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 21:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood the question. The OP was asking about a specific factual detail, not for your critique of her idea. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay my last answer was a bit rude without helping. I'm sorry. If you want to get the lady cut off the yatch rope maybe you should watch a show called Mythbusters. They did something similar to that and it should help you. I hope. Now I can't remember the episode number, but you should watch. Especially if have many other ideas like propelling a dude off the roof with a handmade jet pack. Mythbusters should help, let just hope.

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 21:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you FisherQueen. I'm well aware that the idea is rather cliched. My novel is a psychological thriller, not an action adventure. I'm hoping the originality will be in the dialogue, thought processes, and relationships, not the occasional action sequence. My reason for wanting this particular type of climax, which will require extra research for me when I know so little about boating lore, is for irony considering necessary elements of the plot and as a sort of subtle tribute to a couple of my favorite movies. Thanks for recommending Mythbusters, Cardinal Raven - I'll see if I can track that one down. I've seen a few episodes and they are always quite enlightening and entertaining. - Aletheia James —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.139.75 (talk) 18:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

The movie/book Dead Calm might give you some ideas.hotclaws 03:21, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Smell

Hello, I have a quick question, that's probably pretty unusual. I have Anosmia, which means I can't smell anything. It's hereditary so I've actually never smelled anything in my life. And I'm just wondering, does semen have a smell? Is it distinct and recognizable? Thanks. 76.8.208.7 (talk) 04:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

To the first, yes. It's fairly light though. To the second, I don't know as I've never happened upon an instance when I've said "What's that smell?" and have it be followed by "Semen." in order to compare the two. Dismas|^(talk) 04:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Semen smell is pretty distinctive. Its often described as smelling like laundry rooms, swimming pools or hospitals. This is because semen contains pentamethylenediamine (also known as cadaverine, a decarboxylation product of the amino acid lysine), spermine and spermidine. These compounds all smell a bit like bleach or ammonia, which are found in the aforementioned places. Rockpocket 05:10, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Which explains why it stings if it gets into your eyes (don't ask ..). -- JackofOz (talk) 08:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

TMI, Jack, T-M-I. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 12:10, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

There was a bit on The Office where a stripper is entertaining the office crowd and sitting on the dopey manager's lap, and he comments innocently, "You smell nice. Like Tide".  :) --Sean 13:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Hard to imagine a situation when you WOULD be exposed to enough semen to be able to smell it distinctly, without already knowing what it was that you were smelling. And frankly, I'm not sure that's something I want to imagine. - Aletheia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.139.75 (talk) 05:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

You've presumably never tried to clean a teenaged son's bedroom, then. Grutness...wha? 02:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

i take that you are not a man then Aletheia, as we come (snigger, snigger) across the situation all the time 195.188.254.82 (talk) 12:38, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm a woman. And happy to say I have never been confused by the smell of my own bodily fluids. - Aletheia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.139.75 (talk) 16:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Urban national borders

You can cross a national border inside Rome, by entering the Vatican City. You used to be able to cross a national border (albeit with some trouble) in Berlin. Are there any other places where there is an urban national border? Perhaps a wikilist? 130.56.65.24 (talk) 05:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I can think of a bunch just in Ontario/Michigan and Ontario/New York (Detroit/Windsor, Sarnia/Port Huron, Niagara Falls, numerous other places along the Niagara River and the St. Lawrence. But I get the impression I have misunderstood the question...do you mean a border entirely contained within a city? Adam Bishop (talk) 07:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

The Canadian/U.S. border divides a town on the Vermont/Quebec border in half. Even splits a factory in half. Can't remember the name of the town off the top of my head though... Dismas|^(talk) 08:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Dismas may be thinking of Rock Island and Derby Line.

There are several places on the US/Mexico border with urban land on both sides, such as San Diego / Tijuana. Basel in Switzerland has suburbs in both France and Germany; Geneva has suburbs in France. The capitals of the two countries called Congo face each other across the Congo River. And then of course there's Monaco, which is perhaps most like the Vatican situation: pretty much the whole country is urban and the urban area extends beyond its borders into France. --Anonymous, 09:02 UTC, June 16, 2008.

Derby Line, Vermont is it. I had just Googled it because I couldn't think of it. Thanks, Anon. Dismas|^(talk) 09:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Border town is worth checking out for a list of such places. Grutness...wha? 11:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Nicosia in Cyprus is still a divided city. Fribbler (talk) 11:57, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I once read about a bar on the US/Canada border where the line was marked with a stripe on the floor. If you were 18-20 years of age, you had to cross to the Canada side to be of age to order a beer. --Sean 13:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

For a couple more examples, we have Jerusalem divided between Israel and Palestine and Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan/Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario divided between the US and Canada. StuRat (talk) 14:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

To be fair, it should be noted that many of the cities nominally on the U.S./Canada border are separated by significant bodies of water. The two Niagara Falls are divided by the Niagara River and (unsurprisingly) Niagara Falls. Detroit and Windsor sit on opposite sides of the Detroit River. Sarnia and Port Huron have the St. Clair River between them, while the two Sault Ste. Maries face each other across the St. Marys River. And of those cities, I would only categorize Detroit as a major center (its population is about one million people). Windsor is the second-largest city on this list with a population of about two hundred thousand; all the other cities have fewer – often quite a bit fewer – than a hundred thousand residents. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:14, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Border between Belgium and the Netherlands

The Schengen Agreement page has some photos of international borders in urban places (which due to the agreement are open borders now). One photo to the right here. Another shows the border going through a building. Another is in a urban environment. Pfly (talk) 18:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for your answers. Yes I was after specifically places where the national border runs through an urban area (such as along a particular street (thus border town is just what I want). The US-Canada border is a relatively obvious one, but my US geography is sketchy (I'm Australian - we don't have any land borders). I have decided I must go to some of these places - it's an eccentricity of mine. Steewi (talk) 01:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Then you must hit Nicosia, Mostar and Berlin (even if it isn't divided now, the mentality remains. Fribbler (talk) 01:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

For anyone still following, I just found divided cities, a list of cities in the situation I described (and thanks Fribbler). Steewi (talk) 02:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

nightmares and irrational fears

I keep having these bad dreams that Margaret Thatcher blames me for her resignation and downfall and has set Norman Tebbitt on me, and this 1980's band called the Flying Pickets want me to appear in their new video. It's got so bad that I won't go down to my local Sainsbury's as I'm afraid of who I'm going to bump into. How can I quell these nightmares? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freller Mellon (talk • contribs) 09:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

best thing to do is to try to work out why those particular images keep occurring in your dreams. What are your feelings about Thatcher's downfall? Of the song "Only you"? Or - perhaps more realistically, consider the term "flying picket" and the Thatcher years. Are you somehow subconsciously worried about worker/boss relations? If you can try to make some sense of the dream, it quite often makes it less likely to recur. Mind you, considering that last night I dreamt that my name was Robbie Robertson (and had to keep telling people "no, not the guitarist") and that I was trying to enrol at a college in Israel during an air raid, who am I to talk? Grutness...wha? 12:00, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't agree with Grunt. The most simple thing is to take control of your dreams. You only dream what you want to dream. If this is a true nightmare you shouldn't even have to think about it. You should just dream what you want. When you close your eyes think of something. A white pony with magical wings. That is the image that should pop up. Just think of what you want to dream. Take control of your dreams and don't let your dreams take control of you.

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 20:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

"Grunt"??? Please check my username before you ruin it! And "you only dream what you want to dream" is completely wrong unless you lucid dream all the time, which is exceptionally rare. Grutness...wha? 01:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, but that doesn't always work. Especially if it's a vivid nightmare, the setting is often difficult to control. Also see lucid dreaming, but most nightmares are unlikely to be lucid. Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 21:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

In a article in a magazine I believe was called Science News a scientist had talked about how our dreams affect each other. That certain dreams reflect reality and others are just mere fantasies. Certain nightmares can be controlled by the thought of another fantasy or want, or just another dream.(Most of my dreams are lucid so if I dream something I don't want to I change it.)But some people can't do that. You can train yourself to though. Anyway I just wanted to add another opportunity or another idea of controlling a dream.

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 22:00, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Very few people can do that, and training yourself to be able to is very tricky, to say the least. A major problem is being aware that you are dreaming while you are dreaming, which is often not possible, even when the elements of the dream seem preposterous to our awake minds. Yes, if you can do that it's a fine method, but for most people it's not practical. In any case, trying to deal with the underlying cause is a far better long term solution than simply trying to avoid the dream (which is most likely a symptom of some other worries). Grutness...wha? 01:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Learning to have lucid dreams may help, but it's not easy (being highly aware of your dreams is a good first step, though) and even those of us who are lucid dreamers rarely have complete control of every dream. However, sometimes just knowing you're dreaming, even if you have trouble changing what's going on, can be very comforting. (If you ARE able to control your dream in whole or in part, you're in for a fantastic experience!) For dealing with your nightmares here and now, though, do try to understand what they're telling you. Also, think about any changes that have occurred in your body recently. Are you on any new medications, for example? Some medications can cause bizarre dreams; fortunately, this effect becomes a little less severe with time. Try falling asleep thinking of something positive and good that you'd like to dream about, or imagining the voice of someone you perceive as a benevolent authority, telling you that you will have good dreams tonight and wake up feeling refreshed and ready to start the day. (Autosuggestion is a very powerful tool.) If the nightmares persist, you may wish to seek professional help. -Aletheia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.139.75 (talk) 18:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Vote Labour is all I can think ofhotclaws 03:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

stupid

People say I look like a stupid fool.Gradually even I am finding myself a one.I am a 20 yr old guy but I look childish both mentally and physically.Now I can hit the gym and look like arnie but what about my mental configuration.Like a child I am still attracted to all the bling bling and anything which is jazzy.On the other hand I am reluctant to leave my whole personality and start a new one.How can I start looking MACHO? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.246.173.175 (talk) 12:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

You don't want to leave your personality behind just because other people think it is childish; you have your tastes and your personality, and that's part of who you are. What you could do is try to develop other tastes as well, so that you can join in and blend in with other people when necessary. To do that, just try exposing yourself to a variety of things that you think the people you're trying to blend in with would find tasteful and mature. Hopefully you'll find a thing or two that you can enjoy in amongst all of this, and that will lead you to others. Then you can use these things around those people who you think you need to be more 'mature' around, and enjoy the jazzier stuff when they're not around. Also, bear in mind that there's nothing wrong with a supposedly 'childish' personality; it can bring you great pleasure in little things, and can keep your mind flexible and open. 79.66.45.237 (talk) 13:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Note that many would consider the desire to look macho to be immature. I also think that as many women are repulsed by a man wearing gold chains over his hairy chest with the shirt open to the waist as are attracted by this image. StuRat (talk) 14:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I am over 70 and still am being told I am childish. But only by those who feel they are adults and so responsible for others' actions. Nosey parkers and do-gooders in other words. Do try not to grow up. And I looked so young that I still got into the cinema at half-price when I was 26. So don't worry. Life is good if you don't take it too seriously.90.9.87.150 (talk) 14:12, 16 June 2008 (UTC)DT

Good day. The other at top gave you some nice advice. I will try to follow in their footsteps. Another thing you should see that might be considered immature is listening to what people say. And letting their words control your life. What I mean is that they call you "stupid" and "childish" you let those comments make you change who you are. Never listen to people like that. You are right for you. They are right for them. I'm right for myself. You have to be happy with who you are and not let others control who you are. Now that doesn't mean you can't change aspects of your personality you don't like. It means you don't change for anyone else accept yourself. I hope I have helped and I hope that my words will be taken in consideration. Have a positively wonderful day.Rem Nightfall (talk) 16:30, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Irritation and frustration

I am irritated by many things.I am irritated about superpower america dominating on less powerful nations.I am frustrated about arrogant people who are both good looking and smart.I am irritated abut hollywood which portrays americans as impeccable and people of other countries as pure rouges.I am frustrated abut hypocritical people who are leading rich lives. I am irritated because we are not good as we think so.The list is endless and so is my misery.Please help me feel happy about something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.246.173.175 (talk) 13:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Options:

1)Find a happy news story, although you'll have to watch which news source you use as there can be severe values dissonance. Try here or here perhaps.

2)Find something you can do about one of the things that irritates you, whether it's campaigning for political change, awareness raising, charity work, making your own film that portrays the world as you see it, etc. Then repeat whatever version of the serenity prayer helps you (the sentiment is good, no matter what you think of prayer itself

The US only tries to control nations which pose a threat to the US or other nations. You will find very little US attempt to control Tuvalo, for example. Also consider the altenatives. If the Soviet Union had developed nuclear weapons first, they no doubt would have carried out their stated plan to conquer the world for communism. Or, if neither side had nuclear weapons, the Soviet Union would have continued on to conquer Western Europe as well as Eastern Europe. The US, on the other hand, didn't use them to conquer any nation after Japan (which, of course, posed a severe threat to the US during WW2). The US then gave Japan independence. We may soon end up with a world dominated by China, whose pro-genocide stance in Darfur, Sudan and Myanmar/Burma, occupation of Tibet, support for the rogue nation of North Korea, desire to conquer Taiwan, and abysmal ecological record will make the world into a much worse place. StuRat (talk) 13:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Sturat, I would suggest that that comment is unlikely to be helpful and is likely to feed into some of the very things the person finds irritating. I would also suggest that any replies which attempt to rebut Sturat's points above are likely to lead to political debate on the desks. Perhaps Stu could extend an invitation to his talk page for anyone who is tempted to engage in political debate? 79.66.45.237 (talk) 14:07, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure, debate is always welcome there. StuRat (talk) 14:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Try getting up before dawn one summer's morning. Sit quietly in the garden and watch, with wonder, how another lovely day begins.90.9.87.150 (talk) 14:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC)petitmichel

Firstly try reading some balanaced political media rather than the moralistic stuff that many channels pump out (both sides over-simplify their arguemnts and over-state the benefits/pitfalls of their idea compared to their opponents). Secondly be slow to judge people, states or situations - rarely do people make sound judgements - the story is always more complex than you imagine it to be. Remember this - both sides in a war think they are fighting fo the just-cause, history usually decides which we consider to have been the most just. Finally - don't let bad news get you down. It's everywhere, all the time but so is good news. Unfortunately the story of a man helping save the life of 10 people in country Y isn't going to get the coverage that a man shooting 10 people in country Z will. Remember good things happen every day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.221.133.226 (talk) 14:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I feel your pain, OP - oh wait, do you hate the phrase "I feel your pain" as much as I do? Anyways, I'm irritated and frustrated by the same things you are. My suggestions to make you happy? Take a break from worrying about the cares of the world and do something purely for fun. Cultivate your spirituality (even if it's just to get in touch with your own better self). Break the mold of arrogance and hypocrisy, and do something generous and loving for someone else. And if possible, go to your local animal shelter and adopt a dog, and you'll never be wanting for joy, love, and laughter in your life again, no matter how idiotic humanity gets. - Aletheia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.139.75 (talk) 17:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Troll bridge question

If someone demands money in exchange for passage on a bridge, road, etc., and is not legally entitled to do so, what crime have they committed ? StuRat (talk) 14:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

My first thought was that it would be a form of extortion, but I'm not finding any good sources to back that up... --Onorem♠Dil 14:36, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Here's an article where it's described as extortion. I wouldn't doubt that there's still a more specific term though. --Onorem♠Dil 14:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

It is not necessarily extortion. If the payee believes that the toll is legal, and the receiver acts to appear that it is legal, it would be deceit. 80.58.205.37 (talk) 15:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

If the person they're demanding money from actually gives them the money, under false pretenses, that certainly qualifies as con artistry. Call it deceit, call it swindling, call it whatever you want - they've committed theft. - Aletheia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.139.75 (talk) 17:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

But I still want to know what the legal charge against them would be. Does "extortion" still apply if there is no threat against the victim other than blocking their path ? StuRat (talk) 18:36, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Misrepresentation? Fraud? Demanding money under false pretences? Extortion? Impersonation for the purposes of defrauding members of the public? I'm sure they could find something that would stick. Exxolon (talk) 18:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

The precise charges on the indictment will depend on the jurisdiction. Offences like fraud, extortion, and theft will have slightly different definitions in different places; it's also possible that the crime might fit under several different statutes. Some jurisdictions may even have specific offences enshrined in law along the lines of "impersonating an agent of the FooNational Freeway System". TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Trolls are usually under the bridge anyway. Why bother paying? Matt Deres (talk) 17:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Risky strategy unless you have an older, juicier brother ready to cross the bridge after you. 79.66.85.219 (talk) 12:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Surely the answer is trolling? (NB the usual punishment is starvation.) --Dweller (talk) 20:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Identify the Arrows

On bins, milk cartons, cans of cola - just about anywhere, I keep seeing this sign with three arrows chasing each other. What does it symbolize? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonic Love (talk • contribs) 15:15, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Recycling. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 15:18, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes it's associated with the motto "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle." It's an all-around logo for environmental friendliness. On a milk carton, soda can, or anything else disposable, it means you can recycle it. On a bin, it means you can put your recyclables there and they'll be hauled off to a recycling plant instead of the dump. - Aletheia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.139.75 (talk) 17:00, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

"On a milk carton, soda can, or anything else disposable, it means you can recycle it."
This is not always true at all. On plastics that symbol with a number in it indicates the type of plastic. However not all plastics can be recycled, and some are so difficult to recycle that most places don't bother. APL (talk) 19:38, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

In NZ, while 1-2 are recycled by most places, 1-6 are now recycled in at least some places Nil Einne (talk) 02:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

See Recycling symbol and, for the ones on plastics, Resin identification code. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:36, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

There's a sorting section here[1]. Julia Rossi (talk) 01:26, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

iPods

Now days, almost every single MP3 players looks like a variation on the iPod's flat-rectangle-scrollwheel-under-a-square-screen, did iPod create this layout or did they copy from someone else?

No offence to Apple fans, of course :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.240.203.201 (talk) 16:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

There's this (http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/art/2008/01/apple_braun_ive_rams.html) which is an interesting read about design-similarities between apple (inlcuding the iPod and most things designed by Jonathan Ives) and older-products... Infact the who classics of everyday design series has been a very enjoyable read so far (http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/art/2006/11/jonathan_glanceys_wonders_of_e.html) ny156uk (talk) 17:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if they copied Creative or it was just a patent fight. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 20:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Possibilty Of Life

Here is a thought. Life cannot exist without a sustainable atmosphere, water, and oxygen. Yet, we have creatures who survive in the most complicated or extreme environments. So what is to say that no other life on other planets cannot exist? If life here has learn to cope with certain environments then why cannot life on other planets with thinner atmospheres not cope with the methane in the air. Why are we searching for another Earth? We might not be able to live in such environment, but another species might. That is why we call them aliens. They have evolved to adapt to their home. Why don't we see that as a possibility? Why do we only see as you need water and oxygen? There might be life that has learned to survive in an even more harsh environment. From what we have learned from this planet and the coping of many animals we should be able to infer something of that level. So, why don't we?

Thank You

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 19:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Err, who says the people who study such things make all the assumptions you say they're making? You might look at extraterrestrial life and alternative biochemistry for starters. Friday (talk) 20:30, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Well most of the people who don't make those assumptions are probably not on television. Half of the documentaries I watch they say that life is not possible on the other planets because there isn't enough oxygen and water. Or it's to hot, to cold, etc.

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 20:42, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I think that those people are specifically talking about the other planets in our solar system, not all the planets in the universe. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Why would that matter? As for the stuff they say on TV, often times you'll hear people talking about "life as we know it" rather than just "life" to allow for the possibility of weird stuff we don't know about. Friday (talk) 21:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

) I suppose I see.Cardinal Raven (talk) 22:00, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I often hear the requirements you listed being necessary for "life as we know it". That is, there may be other forms of life which are possible, but we don't really know. Therefore, the scientists limit conjecture to the life they do know about, which is carbon-based Earth life. You do have a valid point that this may very well cause us to skip over many other forms of life. Your question, BTW, was very good. StuRat (talk) 01:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

All I am saying with my question is this. If we don't look into that possibility even if we don't know much about silicon based creatures we can learn from study. If we don't look for something that could be unimaginable to us then we will never learn and may skip life. If we are only looking for planets and life forms like Earth we are only trying to find ourselves. We have to look far beyond what we know and dip ourselves into a deeper pool. We have to dive into the unknown to understand the unknown. If we never look, we'll never learn, if we never learn, we'll never understand, and if we don't understand then we don't know. The point is to know. Do I believe there is life? Yes, I believe there is life and I believe we have to open our minds and our thoughts to something beyond what we can comprehend. Because life exist, life copes, and life adapts. And these are what scientist should also consider. They should also consider the possibilities. Because possibilities can be endless, but once we understand the possibilities nothing can stop us.

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 02:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree, but scientists must make decisions based on probabilities. If they have a choice between landing a probe on Pluto or Titan, they must consider that life seems more likely on Titan. They could be wrong, of course, but that would be the best bet based on our experience with life on Earth. StuRat (talk) 03:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there are possibilities, and endless as you mentioned. And almost all of them are considered. See, Simulated reality for example. manya (talk) 03:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Well I didn't mean consideration in that sense. I mean the possibility of studying something we don't fully understand and then knowing it. That is fine and dandy, they can send a probe onto Titan and yet, they can have someone else study Pluto. Maybe what we need is an Earth alien team and a Unknown Substance Alien team. So we can study both possibilities. And understand so much more about life. And maybe the most that would come out of studying both is that we fine life. May it be primitive then us or far more intelligent then us.

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 04:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

The problem is they only have so many resources, sending a probe to either of those places is extremely expensive and a huge undertaking, and there's only so much you can learn with telescopes. There are just too many places to look so they have to narrow the search down, and the easiest way to do that is by looking for the kinds of environments that we know can support life. 192.45.72.26 (talk) 15:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Philadelphia Zoo

How much does a single day, adult pass cost to the Philadelphia Zoo?--Endless Dan 20:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Have a look at their website: [2] Prices a plenty! Fribbler (talk) 20:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I can't. I don't have access to the internet (other then Wikipedia and encyclopedia websites). --Endless Dan 20:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, right. $17.95 in high season (march-november). It's pricey enough. But I suppose it's a full day out. Fribbler (talk) 20:42, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! You think its pricey? I think 17.95 is a good deal. --Endless Dan 20:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

After looking at the equivalent price here in Ireland, it seems to be the going rate. Enjoy! Fribbler (talk) 20:57, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Silent Deskers

I'd check these reference desks fairly regularly but rarely contribute anything. I've probably read pretty much everything posted for the past six months or so. Obviously the same names frequently show up on the various boards asking and answering question and you have some names ask or answer once, not to be seen again. My question is; are there many people that frequently visit the boards but remain pretty much invisible. (Of course if there are they probably won't answer.) Just curious. Stanstaple (talk) 20:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I lurked in the shadows for a long time before I started to contribute. I'd imagine there are many who just like to read the questions and answers. No way to tell how many, though, that I'm aware of. Fribbler (talk)

I was here for a few months before I finally started to contribute days ago.The Reader who Writes (talk) 20:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I enjoy reading the Q&As found on the reference desk. It's actually my favorite part of Wikipedia. --Endless Dan 20:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I read them all twice daily but don't have time to reply (unless I'm desperate!) JoshHolloway 20:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I use to just read the questions and answers. Then I began giving answers. No one likes my answers. I find fighting myself on the reference desk. I'm not a nice person. I try to be, but I am not. I probably wasn't cut out for answering peoples questions. Its my Achilles heel sometimes. Sometimes I answer right other times I'm off. Or forget to put some source and then I get people mad at me.Cardinal Raven (talk) 22:03, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't beat yourself up CR. I think most people here, lurkers or not, know to assume good faith. And I wouldn't say no-one likes your answers.Stanstaple (talk) 22:34, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm the one who is making Cardinal Raven feel bad. I feel badly about it, too, but newcomers to the Reference desk won't know that his answers are almost always incorrect or incomplete, except when they're entirely opinion, and I would hate for someone to leave with a wrong answer or with a bad impression of Wikipedia. I have assumed good faith in assuming that he wants to help but just doesn't understand how to look up answers or cite sources rather than assuming that he is giving deliberately incorrect answers in order to disrupt. I've tried to be polite in asking only for him to cite sources, which I hoped would encourage him to improve his accuracy in answering, but I don't think he gets the idea of reading the question, then looking up the answer, then answering with a link to the answer. While I regret making him feel sad, I'm afraid that I'm very close to asking the community if they'd be willing to block him if he can't find a way to look questions up before answering, rather than answering with half-remembered and incompletely-understood fragments of television programs. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

FisherQueen, you are not the one making him feel bad; I've followed some of the discussion and there are other people who have asked CR to chill. Part of being part of this community means keeping its purpose on target, and when some contributors hinder that purpose, it is up to bold members of the community to do something about it. Assuming good faith, I believe CR just needs to pay attention to the way other contributors add to the discussion and learn to contribute similarly. I haven't had to say anything because you and others have said it for all of us. Mitchell k dwyer (talk) 23:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Bibliomaniac15 introduced me to the Ref desk about two months ago. I usually answer biology stuff here but lurk mostly on the other boards unless something interests me enough to answer.--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:47, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Good evening. I was silent user as well. Hid in the shadows I did. But then I decided to answer questions.(It's like a drug.) Once you answer questions it makes you feel good. Cause you know you are going to give the person information that they will be able to use and help them. That is always a wonderful feeling. I really hope my information helps people. I try my best and I want to make the reference desk a wonderful place. I hope I am fulfilling that and making the reference desk a nice place. Cause I like it here and I like sharing information. I like learning knew things myself. Everyone on the ref desk is a wonderful persons who spends their time looking into the answers for the people with questions. That is always wonderful to know. I also edit articles from time to time. Not so much because that is.....embarrassing a little. But I edit articles and I answer questions on the ref desk because I love Wikipedia. I want to share that love by helping and helping Wiki grow. I want to help Wiki to become a better place. Now I am even more embarrass cause I wrote a whole paragraph of me just blabbering on. Well I better stop blabbering or else. I hope I have answered your question. I hope I have given good information or words that you can understand. Have a positively wonderful day.Rem Nightfall (talk) 23:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

"You of all people should know Terry, in your hotel, there's always someone watching."  ;-) --hydnjo talk 00:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I could only imagine that many people observe the desks but do not post. Through my personal experience, I see that I registered in August 2006, but made only 4 edits between August and December. If other people are like me, they likely have cycles of activity and passiveness. My edits tend to drop sharply (usually to zero) during April (term paper month) and May (finals month), except for April 2007, when I set my personal record for most edits in a month and neglected to hand in a critical paper worth 10% of my grade. Despite making no edits in May since 2006, I know that I never stopped reading the Desk, and I was also one of the Desk lurkers. Nothing wrong with that. Freedomlinux (talk) 03:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not so silent as I used to be – came out of my shell through the friendly ones and observing how people handle conflict: Steve Ummit was kind, Bibliomaniac gave me a refdesk barnstar and here i still am. I have some sympathy for Cardinal Raven since I began to understand that you have a way of expressing yourself that is more poetic/subjective than some. It's not the worst fault to have. Everyone has to find their way, so it's nice to see you are surviving all that. *blink* blink* : ) Julia Rossi (talk) 09:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Yep, nothing wrong with lurking but if you see an incorrect answer or a question without a decent answer and you know the right answer then you really should put the right answer in. And Cardinal, it's probably your refusal to add references to the ... er ... eccentric answers you provide. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 10:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello everyone! I'm relatively new around these parts. I've been visiting the Reference Desk for the past one month. And since I'm still just a high school student, I'm just too afraid that I'll give someone wrong information to really answer people's questions. Of course, that doesn't stop me from asking a few of my own. Have a good day! ^_^ Aanusha Ghosh (talk) 12:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Im here 24 7 but rarely sign my posts193.115.175.247 (talk) 12:21, 17 June 2008 (UTC)Zionist

All the things I wanted to say were already said by other people...even in this case...--Faizaguo (talk) 16:57, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I used to edit all hours of the day possible. I've been fairly inactive for quite a while though. Maybe now I'm a "silent desker." Mac Davis (talk) 17:46, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I read the desks often but never, ever, post there. Aww, crap. Friday (talk) 20:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm a silent reader of the Mathematics desk. I think the last time I posted there was over a year ago. Secretly, it's always been my favourite desk. I also read the Science desk, but rarely post there. For some reason, I hardly ever read the Computer desk, though I when I do, I kinda like it. I regularly read and post at the other four desks. ---Sluzzelin talk 00:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I still read the desks regularly and post occasionally, stirring up controversy in the process. --Bowlhover (talk) 19:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Calculating Restaurants Pars

Is there a formula to be had when calculating Restaurant pars for silverware ,glassware linen etc. Please email response to (removed email) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.183.15.60 (talk) 21:42, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I don't think anyone quite understands your question, can you rephrase it? Pars could be Persian or pairs or.... Mhicaoidh (talk) 05:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Is the question about par ordering and inventory making in restaurant management? PARS is a kind of costing template for calculating costs in a restaurant whether food, or other supplies – a technical term I can't decipher, except that one site explains it as " perimeter-area-ratio". *hand wagging way over head* Julia Rossi (talk) 10:21, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Progression doing bicep curls

I am 6'6", 180 lbs. From Jan. 1 - 31, I did 3 sets of 10 bicep curls for each arm (25 lbs on set 1, 30 on 2, and 25 on 3) daily. Then in February (1-15), I did the same, except 30 pounds for all sets.

Now, it's June, and I have barely worked out since. My workout now is 5 sets of 10 reps for hammer bicep curls, and the same for supinating bicep curls. I go right hammer, left hemmer, right supinating, left supinating, and repeat 4 more times. I use 25 lbs, and can do the entire workout.

My questions are: 1)how fast should I progress to higher weights? and 2) If I started this plan in mid-June, how much weight should I be doing by late August, assuming I continue? Thanks. 70.105.164.43 (talk) 22:47, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

(PS. I do other excersises, but I'm only concerned about that excersise in this question)

I'm seeing several different kinds of sources; it might help to know what your goals are- are you going for strength, health, or big bulging muscles? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Strength. 70.105.164.43 (talk) 23:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

You'd probably be best off asking a trainer at your local gym. The kind of exercises you should be doing will depend on a number of factors, and it's easy to injure yourself if you do them incorrectly. — QuantumEleven 09:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Toasty Me

Good evening. A few days ago I got sunburnt while swimming. It was red the day after and hurt really bad. Now it's made my skin is kind of dark because I am half Hispanic and half British(so white I am supposing)I get over sunburn quickly(the Hispanic part) and I just end up getting darker. Anyway my questions is this, why during the healing process of the sunburn does it itch? Normally if I got burn on a stove or something with an open flame when the burn would heal the burn would never itch. Is there something different about a sunburn then an open flame burn? Thank you for answering my question. I really appreciate it. Have a positively wonderful evening.Rem Nightfall (talk) 23:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

• First, the UVR causes vasodilation of the blood vessels in the skin. That's why you get red. Then, within an hour, mast cells release histamine (among other things), which make you itch. For much more detail, see the eMedicine article I'm reciting from. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 00:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

• Also, if your skin peels, it may be itchy to encourage you to scratch off the old, dead skin. StuRat (talk) 00:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

• An aside here, not directly related to the question. If part of your ancestry is from the British Isles it doesn't automatically mean very pale skin. If your descent is Welsh or Irish there's a chance of slightly darker skin tones (considerably darker in parts of southern Ireland). Also, a follow-up question: if the itchiness is caused partially by the production off histamine by mast cells, would the itch be reduced by taking standard antihistamine hayfever medication? Grutness...wha? 01:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

• As an extra aside, my skin colour is of the Southern Irish variety. I've never burned...ever (and I lived in Laos for months). But my father (Northern Irish) burns in minutes. Fribbler (talk) 01:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Good evening. Thank you for all the answers I really appreciate it. I read the article very informative. On another note I never peel. I think I've peeled once in my life, but most of the time I don't peel. My skin just gets more tan. I put some Aloe Vera on it the second day that I had the sunburn. Another question why is a sunburn hot to the touch, but another kind of cut or bruise isn't hot to the touch? I read the article, but I still don't understand. Sorry. -.-Rem Nightfall (talk) 01:35, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

• It is because of vasodilation near that area. The increased blood flow in that area releases more heat.--Lenticel ^(talk) 03:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)