Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Reference desk

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 131.220.46.25 (talk) at 11:54, 4 June 2009 (→‎suitable hat for south asian men). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
skip to bottom
Select a section:
Shortcut
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

  • Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
  • Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
  • Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
  • Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
  • Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
  • Note:
    • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
    • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
    • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
    • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.


Ready? Ask a new question!


How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

  • The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
See also:




May 28

Really obvious candidates for articles that don't exist yet

The question above about how long it would take to reach our 10 millionth and 1 billionth article got me thinking about subjects that should have articles but don't yet.

Can anyone suggest some subjects for articles that would cause a lot of people to say "Good Lord! How come nobody got around to writing this article before now?". I'm talking about major, significant, widely known people or events, not just footnotes to history or whatever.

The best answers will qualify for my personal GLHCNGATWTABN Award. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article which I'm still surprised no-one has written is road numbering scheme. It's been a redlink under numbering scheme since January 2004, and we have articles on road numbering schemes in various countries, but nothing summarising the various systems. And while perhaps not "major", and certainly not exciting, it's a fairly significant, everyday thing for many people. Warofdreams talk 02:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One are where I think that wikipedia is really lacking is in its coverage of legal issues. There are tonnes of cases/concepts that don't have an article (e.g. Gordon v. Goertz, Housen v.Nikolaisen). Eiad77 (talk) 03:01, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some candidates for GLHCNGATWTABN Award:

Obviously, not many cardiologists or radiologists are editing wikipedia... although they seem to have the time to write 100s of books and 1000s of papers on the subject. Twisted priorities.  :-) Abecedare (talk) 03:17, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice ones. I'm not at all surprised that I haven't been flooded with ideas. In years to come, there'll be thousands of articles that will be on thousands of editors' watchlists, that don't exist yet. They may be on various people's To Do lists, but in most cases they're probably not. This question is like asking about the fantastic ideas that you're going have in the future but haven't thought of yet. If you could think of them in order to answer the question, you'd probably have thought of them already (which I appreciate is a logical absurdity). Anyway, I hope it's prodded some thinking processes. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles, which has a bunch of subprojects. If you think we need an additional subproject for GLHCNGATWTABN, please suggest it there. We could use your help. I work on the Project Gutenberg authora subproject and on the DNB subproject, and occasinally on others. -Arch dude (talk) 01:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of resources to assist this search: Wikipedia:Most wanted articles, Wikipedia:Most missed articles and Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than a year, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles. What never fails to amaze me is how few academic journals have articles (see Wikipedia:List of missing journals/A-C for just a sample). For example of we are missing Developmental Biology (journal) and Developmental Cell, both among the top journals in their field by impact factor. Rockpocket 01:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A list of the many surveillance, centralisated record keeping, and other anti-privacy government measures that have been piling up in the past few years in the UK, the fourth or fifth most monitored country in the world. I'm not sure what the title would be. This really ought to be made easily available to the public, so that people can see how things are insidiously getting worse. 89.240.40.4 (talk) 09:03, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. You'd have to word that article in such a way that didn't make it appear we have an axe to grind. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:24, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

80s movie concerining the African Bushmen

I'm trying to think of this movie I watched a couple of months ago. It was like, the Gods were Fools, or something like that. It dealt with an African bushman trying to get rid of a Coke bottle he thought the gods sent them and then a story of some South African (?) schoolteacher. Anyway, it's a rather poorly produced movie but I'm trying to think of the title. Any help? 75.169.197.132 (talk) 04:27, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Gods Must Be Crazy sounds like the one you're looking for. AlexiusHoratius 04:34, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes! Thanks. 75.169.208.114 (talk) 05:00, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The bit with the land rover is hilarious. It's a great movie. SteveBaker (talk) 05:11, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I for one liked the helicopter scene. --Blue387 (talk) 21:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I love that movie too, in some ways Nǃxau's real life was even more surreal than his movie role, as a consequence of being in it. Rockpocket 00:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Worldwide population of Stuffed Animals ?

In my house the ratio of stuffed animals to humans is at least 20 to 1. Furthermore, stuffed animals generally do not die like humans; most of the stuffed animals ever made still exist. I expect the total to be in the billions if not tens of billions. Any more accurate estimates out there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.36.216.34 (talk) 04:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can see two problems with your thesis:
  1. Not everyone in the world can afford stuffed animals - you might find some large ratio of stuffed animals to humans in (say) North America - but would you find anything like that number in the more populous countries like India and China? I suspect not.
  2. You haven't met my dog have you? If you think stuffed animals are immortal - just put them up against a real animal! Sarah can eviscerate a teddy bear in about 2 minutes flat. Not a pretty sight!
SteveBaker (talk) 05:08, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not an ad but Vermont Teddy Bears are guaranteed so that if your dog chews it up, they'll fix or replace it. Free. Dismas|(talk) 02:22, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Actually due to the Japanese kawaii-culture influence the ratio might be higher than you'd think in China (and other East Asian countries), perhaps even higher than what you'd find in North America. --antilivedT | C | G 08:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean stuffed as in once-was-alive-but-now-stuffed (Taxidermy?) or stuffed as in 'cuddly toy'? I can imagine that there probably exists more cuddly-toys in the world than people, but no way will there be more stuffed-animals (Taxidermy) as it's expensive, not exactly the most popular ornament and, well, i just can't imagine it's true. Cuddly toys, however, will be being produced by the millions every year - that grey one that every girl in the entire world loves (you know the one that looks like it's been beaten up) probably out-numbers humans on its own! At least it feels that way whenever I go to a card shop 194.221.133.226 (talk) 07:33, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What grey one? Nil Einne (talk) 15:44, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think 194.221.133.226 is talking about Me_to_You_Bears.Last Polar Bear (talk) 16:05, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I have over 100, most of whom are around 30 or older, and the ones I kept are in pretty decent shape. While most people don't keep all of their as adults, nor collect so many (I had about 170), it does seem that children in the United States, at least where I'm from, really enjoy them. I'd say the ratio of stuffed animals to people in the U.S. is about 1:1.Somebody or his brother (talk) 23:59, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about that. There are those who are working to improve the ratio. Tempshill (talk) 06:26, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A question about ePSXe...

I downloaded the Playstation emulator, ePSXe. I was about to get the utility BIOS for the emulator when I saw that I coan downloaded it if I have the legal right to do so, that is, if I owned a Playstation, then I can download the BIOS. I do own a Playstation, but it's in ny house somewhere and it's not working. So, would owning a Playstation that does not work still count in the legal right to download the utility BIOS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sirdrink13309622 (talk • contribs) 10:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The real question is "It is Ever OK to download the BIOS?". This is very disputed. It depends on a lot of nuance of copyright law. The answer is probably "no.", especially in the USA, but you'd need a high priced lawyer to hash out the details.
If this worries you, then you really should not download it.
However, I don't remember which one, but isn't there a PS emulator that doesn't need a separate bios download? (I may be imagining that. I haven't needed a PS emulator since I bought a PS2 years ago.) APL (talk) 13:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is a tricky question - and we're straying into the realms of offering legal advice - which the Ref.Desks are not allowed to do. However, in broad terms - and in the USA: If you buy (for example) a music CD - you have the right to make a copy of it (eg to listen to on an MP3 player). If the CD gets scratched or broken - that's OK, your copy is still legit. If you sell the CD (or perhaps if you toss it into the trash), you're required to erase all of the copies you ever made because you no longer own the original CD. Even if you have the original CD, you can't sell your copies and you can't even give them away for free to your friends - and you certainly can't put your copies up on your website for other people to download.
That much seems well established in US law. But:
  • It's not clear that the rights to the software in a BIOS ROM are conveyed in the same way as the music on a CD. Certainly the license terms for (say) a copy of Windows do not permit you to make copies for running on other computers in your house - although you may make a copy for backup purposes. So you might be allowed to make a backup copy of your BIOS ROM - but not run that software on your PC. However, you didn't sign a 'EULA' when you turned on your Playstation - so you didn't agree to any special licensing terms.
  • Even if it's legal to copy your own BIOS ROM for use on your PC, it's not clear that downloading a copy from someone else is legal...even though the data might be utterly identical - the fact that you didn't copy it from your original ROM might make that illegal. That was the issue with the original Napster lawsuit. Napster claimed that only people who'd bought the music on CD were allowed to download it...but the courts didn't buy that argument.
  • I don't think it matters whether your Playstation still works or not...that's not the issue.
So it seems likely that the people who are offering to let you download the BIOS ROM are breaking the law. It's not clear whether you'd be breaking the law by downloading it from them. The fact that this is a tricky matter underscores why we're not allowed to tell you "It's OK" or "It's not OK". If this is important to you - you should take advice from a qualified lawyer. SteveBaker (talk) 14:09, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Walking from London to Edinburgh

Can anybody please tell me if it is actually possibly for an able bodied person (with only an average level of fitness and physically dexterity, and without any specialised training), to walk from London to Edinburgh, without having to use any other means of transport and without trespassing or otherwise breaking the law? If it is possible, are there any resources to assist with planning a route efficiently? Just in case there are any other Londons and Edinburghs on the same land mass, I am talking about London (England) to Edinburgh (Scotland)! :) Any help would be very appreciated. Thanks Chuny Beetroot (talk) 10:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is possible, Janet Street-Porter even managed it in 1998 by walking in a straight line but walking 350 miles or more isn't anything to be taken lightly. Ramblers may be able to help you with routes but nothing beats the OS maps (you can even get small scale ones online now too) and other websites have other information such as the national footpath map (our article) and even accommodation near to popular walking routes. All I can really recommend is lots and lots and lots and lots of planning. Nanonic (talk) 11:32, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That map only refers to some long distance footpaths. In my area, at least, there are several named footpaths that are not mentioned on that map. And there is a dense network of interconnected footpaths all over the countryside, something which no other country seems to have and thus a national treasure. 78.146.211.210 (talk) 21:50, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Nanonic. That is incredibly helpful, especially the footpath map. As you say, this needs a huge amount of planning, but I am hoping that somebody can give me a headstart (which you have certainly helped with!). Am I being too simplistic in thinking that a good route might be one planned around the major footpaths (for example, on the footpath map you linked to, planning around the following route 30 -> 22 -> 19 -> 8 -> 15 - using numbers for clarity). Obviously it would be longer than a more direct route (a very rough estimate on Google Earth seems to be 400-450 miles), but it would seem that I have a much better chance of not getting stuck somewhere and/or misreading the terrain, because those paths are a better known quantity? Thanks again Chuny Beetroot (talk) 11:58, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense. You also probably want to try and walk along pleasant roots. You could probably do it pretty quickly by walking straight along the route of the M1, but it wouldn't be very enjoyable (I don't think you are allowed to walk directly along the edge of a motorway, but you could follow it at a slight distance). --Tango (talk) 12:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leaf it to the other editors to make jokes about your pleasant "roots". :) Matt Deres (talk) 13:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC) [reply]
Have you got enough roots to get water to those leaves? ;) --Tango (talk) 14:20, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Depending on whom you meet along the way, you might have some pleasant roots to tell your friends about. :) -- JackofOz (talk) 21:20, 28 May 2009 (UTC) [reply]
Doing a walk (trek?) of that distance seems like something that would best be attempted with company in my opinion, would make a decent camping holiday for you and a friend maybe. Also, at the end will you walk back or fly or something? Prokhorovka (talk) 20:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are right, it would make a lot of sense to go with somebody else, although I have had no luck recruiting anybody, especially as I plan to maybe do this in the next few weeks so it is short notice. If I go on my own, I am hoping that planning, overdoing the safety, navigation and communication equipment and making sure that I do not go over terrain that is overly risky, should keep me safe. As for getting back, I was thinking that I would get the train back to London. Chuny Beetroot (talk) 08:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Every year there are brave souls who walk from Land's End to John O'Groats. It can all be done along long-distance footpaths (or bridleways, etc.), or across open land where there is no legal need to keep to the path, and anyway there probably isn't a path per se (see Right to Roam). Planning is key, as stated. I recommend you join the Ramblers, for £25 or whatever, and they will be delighted to help you plan your route, complete with B&Bs or youth hostels or campsites. BrainyBabe (talk) 22:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I had a look at the Ramblers website last night and will definitely join them. Thanks for the advice. Chuny Beetroot (talk) 08:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
More specifically, we have an article titled Land's End to John o' Groats, and it actually has routes. The "London to Edinburgh" route would likely take up most of the middle third of the LE-JOG route... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will study this in detail. Having read the article, I am now wondering what is a realistic pace. I am 30, and probably of "average" fitness, but certainly this walk would be far more exercise than I normally do (although I am planning to spend a few weeks doing longer and longer walks within London, to see if I am up to it). Thanks again Chuny Beetroot (talk) 08:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible to walk 30 miles or more in a day, but I doubt that you could sustain a pace of more than about 20 miles a day. That would still be an athletic challenge, in my opinion. If you want the walk to be an enjoyable experience, I would aim to walk no more than 16 miles a day. Personally, I'd want to average no more than 12 miles. That would let you walk 16–20 miles when the weather is good and the terrain is not too tough but fewer when the weather or terrain are challenging. If I were you, I would also plan to take a day for rest and relaxation once every week or ten days. Marco polo (talk) 15:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And plan in extra time for contingencies, eg. injuries (or blisters!) that keep you from walking for a day or two, extremely bad weather that means you lose a day, etc. Nothing ever goes to plan. --Tango (talk) 21:35, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You want to get some experience of walking along muddy footpaths - so different from walking alonmg the pavement. I suggest having a weekend in the countryside, perhaps try camping overnight too. Its very important to get the right footwear. When I've done trips like this, the main problem has always been getting drinking water. 78.146.211.210 (talk) 21:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So I think the message is, take a sabbatical. Prokhorovka (talk) 22:01, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all the above advice. To be honest, I had been hoping that I could maybe do 30 miles a day and wanted to be away for no more than two weeks (which would just about fit with an estimated 450 miles using the main footpaths). From what is being said here, that now seems unrealistic, although could maybe be almost workable with a far more direct line route and a pace of 20 miles per day. Having said that, I don't mind if I fall short of Edinburgh. I do have concerns that I would fall foul of blisters or chaffing (without being too graphic, I do tend to get chaffing on my thighs when walking more than a few miles at a decent pace in warm weather) that would slow be down considerably. I think that a mini-trek is in order, to iron these things out and to also iron out any issues with the camping. The idea of heading off down the Thames Path for a couple of days (starting around Westminster and heading west) seems like it could be a good idea. I also had an idea that I could take all of the food I would need with me from the start, but obviously carrying the necessary amount of water would be impossible. As 78.146... mentions, getting fresh water can be a problem, so I am now wondering how I would go about that. Thanks again for all your help, and any further advice would be very appreciated. Thanks Chuny Beetroot (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Water can be obtained by buying large bottles of mineral water in supermarkets or shops, taps sometimes found in churchyards, public toilets, filling up when you depart from the B&B. You can buy sterilization tables for water from streams, but due to the carcinogenic agricultural fertilizers dissolved in them, it may still not be advisable to drink it. The worst thing about camping is not being able to shower or wash your hair. 89.240.58.231 (talk) 20:02, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I did wonder about stream and the ability to steralise, but now you mention the possible chemical content, I will stay well clear! Chuny Beetroot (talk) 23:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is why planning - with detailed maps - is so important. Clearly you aren't going to be able to carry food and water AND camping gear on 30 mile hikes, day after day for weeks. It's just not realistic unless you've been doing this kind of thing for years and are very sure of your capabilities. Failing that, you need to travel light and pre-plan where you'll be able to stop for food, water (and ointment!)...you need to map out where the little villages are along your route - realise that shops may be shut on Sundays or if you arrive unexpectedly late. You need a day by day plan for the entire route - with rest days built into the schedule and to know where the 'hard' days will be (eg when the terrain is rought) and where the easier stretches are. I think it would be unwise to aim for more than 20 miles per day or more than 5 days hiking per week. I think you shouldn't even consider being more than 1 day away from someplace where you can buy food and water...so you only have to carry at most 2 days of supplies. You should also be sure to take a cellphone and a spare, charged battery that you keep in reserve for emergencies - and plan to spend at least your 'rest days' in some kind of proper accomodation so you can fully recover before the next few days of activity. I agree that you should try a few practice hikes of four to five day duration to be sure your body will hold out without shredding itself(!). SteveBaker (talk) 17:25, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you have problems with chaffing, then wear some very loose trousers. Tight jeans are uncomfortable to walk in. The advice I had was to buy some boots a size bigger than your normal size. I prefer leather boots that rise up over the ankle, that can be secured around the ankle and leave your feet fairly loose inside. The modern trainer-type boots might fall off if you tried that. If you are buying new boots, then work up to wearing them all the time to get fully comfortable in them before you go hiking. With a rucksac to carry, and no previous experience, I would plan on doing only 10 miles a day. Try to keep the weight down as much as possible - the worst part can be the pain from sore shoulders. The rucksac will feel heavier and heavier and more and more uncomfortable as time goes on. It may be worth not having a rucksac and just staying at B&Bs and Youth Hostels, 10 or 12 miles apart. You could walk along the coast for example, where places to stay and drinking water are easier to find. But I'd definately recommend a trial run(s) at least one weekend. 89.240.58.231 (talk) 19:34, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's all very useful. I had been wondering whether taking the coast might be a better idea. It looks fairly comparable to taking the national paths and, perhaps, the terrain would be easier overall - plus, as you say, resources may be more plentiful. If I can only do 10 miles a day then I certainly would not be able to spare the time to reach Edinburgh (although, again, I don't mind if I don't reach it, or have to find a more realistic target) - 2 weeks is really all I can spare. If I only carried a small rucksack (bit of water and food, mobile phone, GPS, maps etc), do you think I could walk significantly further each day? As for the chaffing, I appreciate your help. I am not sure if the loose trousers will help because I think that (again, without trying to be too graphic) it is actually that the top of my thighs react to the sweat and maybe rub together (my wife suggested lyrca running shorts, under my trousers - no idea if they would help!). Thanks again. Chuny Beetroot (talk) 23:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the distance, see how you feel after a trial weekend. The 10 miles was an average as you would probably want to take a day off now and again. If the distance between B&Bs is too little, then you can always walk around exploring the area, which is going to be more enjoyable than just a route march. Remember you will feel tired after walking twelve miles, unless you are very fit. You may get fitter towards the end of the two weeks. Try jockey or boxer shorts regarding the soreness, whichever you do not wear at the moment, or maybe something like Vaseline. Are you sure it is chaffing and not a rash? A rash would be due to a skin infection. I had that, I thought it was just chaffing in hot weather as you did. See a doctor and get it cured. A weekend walking along the coast would be a good start, with just a small day-sac, just to see how you react to walking for hours. When I lived in London I walked up the Lee Valley in stages along the canal there, towards Bishops Stortford. If you want to walk from your front door into the countryside then there was, and may still be, an interesting riverside path along the south bank of the Thames that leads to the east. This may connect with other paths near or on the coast - you will have to research this. The other good thing about walking along the coast is that, away from towns, there is often a narrow strip of land between the fields and the beach where you can camp without worrying about angry farmers.You could walk to somewhere, take the train back home, and return to the same spot next morning. It is worth buying the OS maps that cover your route. The London canals and I expect probably both banks of the Thames, heading both west and east, have paths along them, and are nice walking routes out of the city. You could alternatively take the tube to the most distant station and continue from there. Epping Forest is a nice area for short circular walks, similarly Richmond. This reminds me of my favourite short story The Superannuated Man by Charles Lamb about someone who escaped from feeling trapped in an office by walking out of London into the countryside during his brief holiday - exactly how I felt when I lived in London. 78.149.147.43 (talk) 11:01, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Just wanted to say thanks for all of this advice. I will get it checked out because it does seem more like a rash than chaffing, so it would be great if the GP could do something about it. I will start doing some practice walks this week, so thanks for the tips regarding possible routes. Perhaps if I can get a few long walks in my fitness might improve a fair bit (as you suggest), which could possibly substantially reduce the time for the actual walk. Thanks also for the camping tip near the coast, I have been wondering how the whole camping-angry farmer thing works in practice! Really appreciate your input. Chuny Beetroot (talk) 09:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The crack about other land-masses makes me wonder what's the shortest distance between any London and any Edinburgh — not counting, for example, the streets so named (without a generic term) in Hercules, California. —Tamfang (talk) 06:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How many are there television stations in the world

A dumb pondering had befallen us today: How many television channels could there be in the world? My ballpark figure and first guess would be something close to 20000, including different channels of the same provider (like BBC 1, BBC 2 or BBC Sport, or BBC Poland if there are such things - consider these an example, I just read the news on BBC Online) and regional channels, but not covering direct translations (i. e. should BBC be aired in Poland just with a voiceover). Anyone have too much free time - feel free to ponder. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 13:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any cases of a channel being broadcast in another country just with everything dubbed? Dubbing is a time consuming process and you wouldn't use real-time translation for pre-recorded broadcasts. When content is dubbed it is usually selected and broadcast separately (and much later) than the channel it was originally on. --Tango (talk) 15:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to remember seeing CNN being broadcast, dubbed, in Japan. But not certain. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:10, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The World Radio TV Handbook (a real book on paper) would be a good place to start counting.--81.136.174.160 (talk) 16:08, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One complicating factor to find your answer is the difference between the e.g. European idea of a tv channel, e.g. BBC2, ZDF as one channel broadcast from many locations (with local content at times, still considered BBC2), and the Network model used in e.g. the US and Australia, where say NBC is a network, broadcast by a number of channels throughout the country: KING-TV,KALB-TV and the other 200 or so in Category:NBC_network_affiliates. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 21:18, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And one more thing to consider: there are schools that have their own local school/student TV station. When I watched German TV there used to be quite a few channels that broadcast dubbed programs; almost exclusively except for the news. Voiceovers are used for some interviews. They buy their series and movie rights from various sources. Don't forget armed forces TV and radio like AFN and BFBS. 71.236.24.129 (talk) 01:39, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, guys. These are points to consider. I get the feeling nobody's gonna want to venture a guess? --Ouro (blah blah) 06:08, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd guess 3356. If you want an estimate, however, that's a different story... Aaadddaaammm (talk) 21:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

airplane pilots

In the US, the pilot generally sits in the left seat, same as the driver on American cars, with the backup pilot on the right (for larger planes). Is this the configuration also used for countries with their cars having a right side driver such as the UK, or is it reversed? 65.121.141.34 (talk) 13:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That´s why - travelling from Paris to London - you have to switch planes in the middle of the Channel, hopping from wingtip to wingtip :) --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 14:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No - that's a worldwide standard...except for helicopters, which are reversed. SteveBaker (talk) 14:17, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that helicopter thing in the new terminator movie. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 14:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The movie was so bad you were noticing details such as helicopter pilot positions? I'll steer clear of it then. Prokhorovka (talk) 20:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, come on, the Terminator movies are set in the future in a time of chaos. Things can change. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I actually thought it was entertaining. I am just a detail oriented person, and like finding fault with the science in movies. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 20:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kancamagus Highway

I have been unable to find any explanation as to why the Kancamagus Highway in New Hampshire is said to extend from Conway to Lincoln, when Route 112 ends in Bath. Is this just the result of someone's marketing effort, or is there some reason why they chose not to include the rest of the road? Route 112 is just as scenic the rest of the way past Lost River, over Kinsman Notch, then down the other side along the Wild Ammonoosuc River. Nlusby (talk) 15:47, 28 May 2009

Certainly on my map, the western section of route 112 is identified as "Lost River Rd", while only the eastern section of 112 is identified as the "Kancamagus Highway". You should remember that the road naming process is different from the road numbering process - the names are often traditional and the numbers are often added later for the convenience of ... (who? state/county/mapmakers/?) when the road is upgraded from dirt track to a properly maintained highway. IIRC (though it was a few years ago), nothing on the big sign in Conway suggests the Kancamagus Highway extends beyond Lincoln. If it is simply marketing, it worked on me when I drove from Conway to Lincoln in blizzard, rather than take the safe way back to Boston! Astronaut (talk) 16:36, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a New Hampshire native, who has driven the Kancamangus many times, I can confirm that it does end at Rte 3. in Lincoln, and Rte. 112 continues on to Bath. Yes, Rte 112 is quite pretty on the west side of Lincoln. But it's just not called the Kancamangus Highway. The Kancamangus opened in 1959, and was specifically built as a single road. The other portion of 112 may be quite older, and may predate the Kancamangus by some time. See Kancamagus Highway and New Hampshire Route 112. Having the same route number traverse different road names is very common, and not just in New Hampshire... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Book Title

Resolved

I recall reading a book probably 15 years or so, it is a very well known book possibly a modern classic, set around World War 2, Burma if I am not mistaken, I think it follows a girl, I recall a solicitors maybe the reading of a will, I think maybe the will is read out and it contains the story about the girl in Burma and escaping or capture (not sure) from Japanese soldiers, any ideas thanks. BigDuncTalk 17:01, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Town Like Alice? Nanonic (talk) 18:25, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thats the one thanks I was really starting to annoy me that I couldn't recall the title. BigDuncTalk 18:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

short selling and hurting

If I make $1000 profit in short selling a company's shares, does this mean, I made that company loose $1000. --V4vijayakumar (talk) 17:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, the company has been valued by the market as being less than what it was. You have made the $1000 off of someone that thought the opposite was going to happen. TastyCakes (talk) 17:51, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The vast majority of share trading happen on the "secondary market". That means the company has already sold the shares and now it is other people buying and selling those same shares to each other. The company has nothing to do with it. --Tango (talk) 17:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, unless the company itself bought the shares from you and then sold them back. The only time a company makes or loses money in the stock market is when it buys or sells shares of itself; such as at a Share repurchase or at an Initial public offering, and these sorts of things do not happen very often. Otherwise, the company itself makes or loses no money on its own shares. Under normal operations, the only people who make or lose money on a company's stock are the people who are buying and selling the stocks. Now, what can happen is if the company performs poorly, and starts losing money, the people who own the stock can fire the board of directors. Thus, the people running the company have the motive to maintain a high stock value for its shareholders, since their job depends on it; but the company itself does not make or lose money based on stock value. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:59, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above answers are correct. See Short (finance) for a more precise explanation of what exactly occurs when you short a stock. Tempshill (talk) 18:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Further to Tango's answer, see primary market and secondary market. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 01:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The main way a short sale of stock could directly hurt a company would be if it was an amount large enough to drive down the share price, and it was done shortly before the company was set to issue new stock for sale (which by the way, would also likely make your short sale quite profitable). 65.121.141.34 (talk) 16:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

National Spelling Bee

Has this event ever been won by a student not in eighth grade? One of the rules is that if you win this event you are no longer eligible to compete. It would be cool to be in eighth grade and not be able to enter your school spelling bee because you are the defending national champion. Also, has a contestant ever missed their championship word and ended up losing?

Presumably the bee linked in the section header, which is held in the United States, but which (according to the article) is now international in scope. -- Coneslayer (talk) 11:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

pits of gold

I recall watching a TV program that mentioned that the Aztecs or Mayas or some old culture that would throw gold artifacts into some very deep pits that had water in them. I would imagine that these are protected sites. What are they called, and where are they? Is there a specific museum that holds artifacts from these pits? 65.121.141.34 (talk) 20:50, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you thinking of something like the Sacred Cenote, the pre-Columbian Maya archaeological site of Chichen Itza, in the northern Yucatán Peninsula in Mexico? BrainyBabe (talk) 22:13, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds like the legend of el Dorado? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 01:12, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See also Cenote#Cenotes and the Maya. Deor (talk) 02:13, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These Cenote things sound about right. Thanks. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 13:40, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do you download "Whip it good" by Devo as a ring tone

I live in South Africa and am unable to find a site to download the song "whip it good" by Devo as a mobile ringtone. I am prepared to pay for the download. Usually You can sms a reference code to a short mobile number at specified sms rate and recieve the ring tone.

Please advise41.240.134.34 (talk) 22:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you use the right title it may help. The song is called Whip It and a google search titled Whip It Devo Ringtone yielded dozens of free options. Crack that whip! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Or if you have the album on CD, you could rip that track using you favourite MP3 ripper (or download it from an online store), then copy it to your phone using one of the methods suggested above. Astronaut (talk) 17:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

241 South Tollway extension?

Is 241 South Tollway likely to be complete someday. From sources found only say EPA is so upset about the 241 South, because it destroys most precious lands in orange-San Diego County Line. From 2008 votes like on California State Route 241 article said 8-2 votes say to STOP 241 extension. But the magazine I got mail home say by 2025, the 5 San Diego Fwy will totally SUCK without 241 extension, and Antonio Pkwy will become a parking lot, with deficient traffic (meaning waiting for 5 green lights to even move), that's even worse. So finally, will we ever extend the 241 Tollway sometime in our life? This will not bother me though will upset many of the folks out, I still support this extension.--69.229.240.187 (talk) 23:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you answered your own question; if the EPA has removed their approval the the road is likely dead. For the record, it would not be the first needed bypass route to be stopped in this way (it may not be a bad thing, sometimes the net good of a new road is outweighed by the net bad of the damage it does to an area). See Circumferential Highway (Nashua) for another road with similar problems. It has been in the planning stages for over 50 years. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But those is a different story. Numerous of route extensions in orange county have be planne extension for over 40 years when trying to extend (118, 91, 605, 57, 47 and many naive ones) and one major issue is Interstate 710 building from Alhambra all the way to I-210 in Pasadena. Those are far unlikely than 241 extension, however 241, 261, 133, 73 is much younger, and hasn't last >14 years. --69.229.240.187 (talk) 03:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, there is an argument that adding lanes to freeways does not help with traffic in the long term. When you expand your 8-lane freeway to 12 lanes, after the 2 years of construction are done, traffic congestion is improved along the stretch that has been widened (until you reach the end when everyone crams back into fewer lanes, but that's another story). But this is temporary because many people who are considering moving to the area will choose where to move, in part, based on their commute time. With lowered traffic congestion and shorter commutes, it can be expected that demand will rise for housing in the area; apartment buildings will replace some single-family residences, the population will rise, until you're back to traffic being congested again. This is all via indirect reward systems so it's easy to disagree with me — I don't see a Wikipedia article on this hypothesis, and our Transportation planning article is surprisingly almost a stub. Tempshill (talk) 06:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The feeling here in the UK, is that widening/extending/building a motorway tends to attract more even traffic and soon the road is once again stuffed beyond capacity with slow moving vehicles. This concern, coupled with green protests and rampant nimbyism has brought a halt to major road building in the UK (and even if a project does get through all that, it is mired in many years of planning inquiries). Astronaut (talk) 17:32, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • With this site said 241 South extension should start construction by 2011, and they even be in bold if nothing is done, then traffic jam on I5 in south orange county will skyrocket by 60%. I don't know when is this site update.--69.229.240.187 (talk) 02:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]


May 29

Diana Buttu Email Address

Anyone know where I can find Diana Buttu's email address? For those who are wondering she is a Palestinian-Canadian who was (is?) the PLO spokeswoman and legal advisor. Eiad77 (talk) 00:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To interview Diana Buttu contact the IMEU at 714-368-0300 or info@imeu.net . From IMEU. Hope that helps. Bioskope (talk) 04:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hills in Ireland

Are most of the hills in Ireland man made? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.146.124.35 (talk) 02:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of mountains in Ireland would indicate not. Carrauntoohil, the highest peak on both the island and in the Republic of Ireland, is entirely natural. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We have virtually no man made hills here. In fact, none that I can think of. I'd be interested to know where you heard the suggestion? Fribbler (talk) 13:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps from accounts that certain legendary figures "named" (and thus by implication created) Ireland's features? —Tamfang (talk) 20:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AFAIK, all Hills, Irish or otherwise, are "man-made". Clarityfiend (talk) 03:34, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

architect

hi, i'm the one who posted the "architect and anthropologist" question and i'm the one who wants to be an architect. my friend, after reading your responses decided he would take up science. he sends his thanks. u asked me which grade i'm studying in. well, i'm currently in 11th grade and studying science. thanx for the help u have already given me and i would appreciate some more. also, it would be great if you tell me what specific subjects should an architect be well-versed in, like, for example, whether it's physics, chemistry, mathematics...... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.50.129.159 (talk) 02:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would think that physics and mathematics would be the most useful to an architect. An anthropologist would probably benefit more from some biology and mathematics. However, I always advise people who are picking college course to pick the ones they have the most interest in - a good grade in a less-relevant subject is generally worth more to future employers than a poor grade in a more-relevant subject. You'll probably only have one shot at college - and it's very important for the time to be be a happy one for you. SteveBaker (talk) 02:58, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As Steve notes, typically you will be required to have studied mathematics and physics at the 10+2 level in order to be eligible to gain admission into the 5 year B. Arch programs in India. In addition the schools will also evaluate you for your drawing and engineering drawing skills. You should read up the information at the following websites carefully for specific information and requirements:

Also check the websites of some of the premier architecture programs to orient yourself better with what studying to be an architect will actually involve:

Finally and perhaps most importantly, try to get in touch with current students and/or qualified architects in real life, since they will be able to provide you with specific guidance tailored to your particular education, aptitude and circumstances. All the best. Abecedare (talk) 03:35, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, let me say that I agree wholeheartedly with Abecedare - check the required qualifications and speak to current student and architects. But I also agree with Steve's suggestion that, once you have ensured that you are studying the required subjects, it is wise to consider where your interests and aptitudes lie. Having studied architecture, I agree that mathematics is extremely useful - even if you find a course for which it is not a prerequisite, knowledge of mathematics will be essential for the degree. Physics is useful, but less so - only the materials aspect of the subject, and to a small extent studies of light and sound, really come in to it. Some institutions (at least in the UK) want an art portfolio or qualification, and this is also very useful. Finally, humanities subjects can also be useful - history will give useful background for your study of architectural history, and psychology is useful for considering issues around environmental psychology. Warofdreams talk 13:34, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's best to prepare yourself well with mathematics - a good knowledge of calculus will form the basis for structural design courses. However, the emphasis in architecture school is on design, and any art courses you can take that will increase your facility with hand drawing and computer-aided drawing will be helpful. Architecture schools tend to assume that you can already draw, both technically and artistically, when you arrive. You can expect to spend more than half your time in design studio, and any skills that you can bring to make yourself more productive, or less preoccupied with making up ground in presentation skills, will be of benefit. Likewise, whatever you can do to prepare for the technical subjects, such as having a good grounding in math, will allow you to focus on the design portion of the program. A by-product of art courses will be a portfolio showcasing your design abilities. Acroterion (talk) 20:22, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it's a good idea to see if an architect will let you help around the office. These are lots of semi-skilled tasks, and you can pick up some skills along the way. It can be a good way to see what really happens in an architectural practice. My firm generally has high school interns around; some are now architects themselves, and some decided that architecture wasn't for them, saving them wasted time finding that out through other means. Acroterion (talk) 20:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

King Kong sized Anime

Anyone know how this King Kong sized anime character was made? Is it inflatable? Is it an ad? Dismas|(talk) 10:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probably just photoshopped. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 11:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here are some other images. They also look fake to me, and the fact that there's no news about it supports the 'shop theory. --Sean 14:28, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like some small figurines photoshoped into a picture of the city. APL (talk) 16:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The photoshop theory is also supported by the fact that for gods' sake, how crazy do you think they are? Aside from the subject matter, which would already be enough to prevent any city from approving this, the thing is a fatal accident waiting to happen. Look at the power lines. Your perception of Japan is pretty warped if you took this seriously for even a moment. -- BenRG (talk) 18:53, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Any country that vends schoolgirl saliva is one you can suspend your disbelief about. The only unbelievable thing about that picture is that there aren't octopus tentacles shoved in all the orifices. Matt Deres (talk) 05:37, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's very clear that these are faked. Take a close look at the left foot from Sean's second link - I've made a blow-up of it here - notice how the person who photoshopped it didn't bother to make the region inside the loop of the shoe-lace transparent? And there is a blue 'glow' at the edge of the tongue of the shoe. This is perhaps the most obvious mistake - but all of these pictures exhibit similar errors. It's a dead giveaway. SteveBaker (talk) 17:08, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

relay setting calculation for spaj 140 c

Please do not post the same question in multiple places. This one is also on the Science Ref Desk and answers should be posted there. Edison (talk) 14:44, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking for roleplaying chat site for omni-roleplayers...

Well, I've been a member of some roleplaying sites. I like to add buddies on messengers (like AIM, Yahoo!, Windows Live, etc.) so I can do roleplays on messengers/ I consider myself an "omni-roleplayer" -- I like to roleplay about anything. I ;ole to roleplay any genre, and I like to play with fictional or fan-made characters. Not to be cocky or anything. I searched for other omni-roleplayers like me on the roleplaying sites I joined, but there were quite a few. Mostof the roleplayers in the sites can roleplay in only one genre of another preference, like they can only roleplay in a fantasy world or only in a sci-fi world. So, anyone, are there any roleplaying chat sites with a thorough amount of omni-roleplayers, like many of them? And would those sites have some of the users with messenger address on AIM, Yahoo, Windows Live, etc. so I can add them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sirdrink13309622 (talk • contribs) 12:29, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bridal Shower Gift Amount

I have been invited to a bridal shower in Canada and the invitation suggests a money gift. What is the rule of thumb for an appropriate amount for a bridal shower (monetary) gift? What is the rule of thumb for the gift amounts for the bridal shower vs. the wedding present? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.82.105.12 (talk) 15:30, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Monetary gifts are a terrible invention, they make the gift-exchange system fall-down. That said I would suggest that a bridal-shower gift should be (value wise) reasonably small. I don't think i'd personally spend anything more than 1/4 of what i'd spend on the wedding present. This site (http://www.favorideas.com/learn-about/etiquette/bridal-shower-etiquette/) or a search for 'bridal shower etiquette' may be worth a look too. ny156uk (talk) 15:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The amount you give the broad should reflect how well u know her. If its just some chick you work with, not much. Best friend, more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikivanda199 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I really don't get the point of money gifts for a bridal shower. For a wedding present, maybe - they are supposed to get the couple set up in their new house and money can be helpful there, but a bridal shower is about having some fun, pampering the bride a bit and showing how much everyone loves her. You don't do that with money, you do that with gifts that have some thought behind them. Unless you think the bride will be offended by you not following the instructions on the invite, I would advise against giving money. Find something fairly cheap (compared to the wedding present) that is somehow relevant to the bride or, even better, relevant to your relationship with the bride. --Tango (talk) 16:06, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

max speeding

What is the most over the speed limit that someone has been cited for? I have heard of someone doing 120mph in a 30mph zone, which is 90mph over. How much over is the record? 65.121.141.34 (talk) 16:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The fastest speeding ticket ever was for...242mph, I think, in a 75 zone. That's 167 over. Vimescarrot (talk) 16:39, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speeding ticket, at the bottom, has the relevant info. Vimescarrot (talk) 16:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the guy qualified simultaneously for the "Dickhead of the Decade" award. Richard Avery (talk) 16:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive my ignorance, I don't drive and I'm familiar with this occurence only inasfar as it was described as Top Gear - so based on that information: what's the problem with driving quickly on a very long, very straight, very empty road? Vimescarrot (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, one problem is that at that speed, few roads are "long"! At 240mph - you're covering a mile in 15 seconds. Small problems (debris in the road perhaps) that is too small to see at half a mile away - are only 7 seconds from being under your car. People who have driven for a while have reaction times that are tuned to the 30mph to 70mph range. At twice that speed, you're quite unprepared for how fast things happen. The tendancy to twitch the steering to avoid a pothole or something is just lethally dangerous at those speeds - and you're just not used to looking a quarter mile ahead of your car for potholes that you must avoid with less than four seconds of warning in a car that's probably horribly unmanouverable at that speed. But people rarely have that expertise. The guy in the Koenigsegg was going three times faster than his reactions and experience were attuned to. That is definitely dangerous. The one (and only) time I took my tricked out MINI Cooper'S to 140mph - I was scared out of my wits!...Only too happy to drop back to 70! SteveBaker (talk) 02:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's also the fact that you can't know the road up ahead is empty. If someone pulls out of a side road in front of you when you're doing those kinds of speeds, you don't stand a chance of stopping in time. Yes, they were wrong to pull out in front of you, but that doesn't make either of you any more alive. --Tango (talk) 16:08, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed - the person pulling out isn't mentally attuned to the closing speed of a 240mph car! When you see another car a quarter mile away, it's a little speck - you're very likely to pull out figuring you have fifteen seconds to get up to highway speeds - which is plenty. You don't expect it to be right next to you going probably 10 to 20 times faster than you just four seconds later! SteveBaker (talk) 16:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Vimescarrot (talk) 10:16, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There have been others that would rival that record but many tickets at this level are successfully appealed on the grounds that the prosecution can't prove the car is physically capable of the speed recorded. It is perfectly possible that a higher speed was achieved but only because the driver of the car worked it in mysterious ways. Prokhorovka (talk) 21:09, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why would the prosecution have to prove the car physically capable of that? You have the evidence from the radar gun and if you need it - the manufacturer's specification for the car showing that it can do that kind of speed...what else do you need? You go to the Koenigsegg web site - and right there it says that the car is capable of 245+ mph. (Note the '+'!) The car was clocked at 242mph. Case closed. The primary evidence here is the record from the radar gun and the testimony of the cop. The defense has to find a way to disprove that evidence - and it's going to be difficult. It might be a different matter if the car (as purchased) was only capable of much lower speeds - but that the owner had modified it to go faster...but that's very unlikely to be the case and it could easily be shown that the car had been modified. In this case, it could also be shown that the driver was participating the Gumball 3000 rally (yes - just like in the movie "The Gumball Rally"!) - and racing on public highways is illegal at any speed. SteveBaker (talk) 16:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I took the liberty of fixing your link. Matt Deres (talk) 21:59, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the cases I've heard about where people have got off of tickets by claiming the car couldn't do that speed have been cases where the measured speed was faster than the manufacturer's specs said it could do. Whether that was because the measurement was wrong, the specs were wrong or the car was modified, I don't know, but the burden is on the prosecution to prove it wasn't the former, and that is rather difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt. --Tango (talk) 13:34, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the manufacturers specifications are sometimes on the safe side. Engines produce more power in cold weather than in hot - and air resistance changes with temperature and humidity. Also, two individual engines off the same production line but build six months apart have different engineering tolerances and will produce slightly different performance numbers. So if the manufacturer provides a conservative figure for top speed - it's certainly possible to exceed that number. Although, in many modern cars, there is a speed limiter fitted to the car to ensure that it won't go faster than the specification - but such things can be removed. It seems to me though that you'd have to be going a LOT faster than the car is theoretically able to go in order to cast sufficient doubt on the radar gun's readout. Speed guns are known to have an error range of +/- several percent...so if the gun said "240mph" and the car manufacturer said it could only go up to 235mph - you'd probably still be convicted for speeding...but just by a lesser amount.
There was a case in the UK many years ago when radar speed guns were new - of one of those front-end dumper trucks (which had a maximum speed of 25mph) being clocked by police as 120mph - but that turned out to be because the vibration of the vehicles' body was enough to fool the radar gun into thinking it was going 120. Clearly that was cause for dismissal (presumably, the police never even charged the driver because it's so obvious). SteveBaker (talk) 19:22, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Torch the streets

Just now I started watching an episode of Doctor Who and it showed a quick clip of workmen using a blow torch on the pavement of the street. It wasn't new construction, it looked to be repair work. Why were they doing this? I've never seen this happen in the States... Dismas|(talk) 19:00, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was this the episode with the 2012 Olympics (that's the only one I remember having any roadworks in it)? If so, they were filling in pot holes, I guess the blow torch was to heat the tar up again if it hadn't set level (which was a problem described in the episode). Alternatively, it could be to burn off something that was covering the road (as a by-product of the repairs, presumably). --Tango (talk) 19:06, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That is indeed the episode. The tar doesn't ignite? Dismas|(talk) 19:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bitumen boils at 525c, I would imagine you'd have to get it a bit hotter than that to burn it. Nanonic (talk) 19:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Asphalt doesn't burn without a great deal of help - it's hard to heat the mass of the street and keep it hot long enough . They may have been softening the surface to allow adhesion of new asphalt. Also, there are some kinds of thermoplastic markings that have to be torched down, like crosswalk lines. Acroterion (talk) 19:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't seen the episode in question, but I've seen workmen using blow torches to remove lines from the road. Astronaut (talk) 20:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One should remember that at the end of that episode it is revealed that the alien homed in on that point for it's heat, so the blowtorch may just be to highlight the heat there. Would be a bloody subtle hint though. Prokhorovka (talk) 21:06, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And you don't need all that much heat to soften bitumen - I recall seeing photos in the 1980s of a line of trucks that had stopped on a highway in 50 degree C heat and sunk somewhat. --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 01:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think they actually use blowtorches anymore, I saw workmen the other day using a very bright glowing bulb holding it over the tarmacadan, I presume this is a newer technology way of achieving the same end without using a naked flame. AllanHainey (talk) 16:04, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
New technologies don't usually replace older ones instantaneously. I imagine the use of blowtorches for this purpose (which I have also seen within the last couple of years) will persist for a good while yet. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 19:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

US bank safe deposit boxes

Are the contents of safe deposit boxes in banks of the US insured in the event of a natural disaster or robbery? How is that handled since only the renter of the box knows the contents? 65.121.141.34 (talk) 19:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As this article notes, the FDIC does not cover the contents of safe deposit boxes. Under certain circumstances, the bank's liability insurance should apply (such as if a robbery is committed by a bank employee) but generally SDB contents fall under the remit of the renter's own insurance policies -- which nicely solves the issue of knowing the contents. — Lomn 19:43, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sports car vs truck engine

I believe this question was asked maybe a year ago, but I felt that it did not receive a sufficient response.

What is inherently different about the engine of a fast sports car and a pick-up truck that allows the former to drive very quickly and the latter to tow a lot of weight?

Suppose if I was to take the engine of a Ferrari F430 and drop it into a Ford F-150, would the truck suddenly be able to accelerate very quickly (of course slower than the Ferrari because its heavier)? Similarly, why do sports cars with, say 500HP, have such low towing capacities, when trucks such as the F-150 have a much max lower HP rating, but a high towing capacity?

Is it because the engine of trucks are producing more torque at a lower RPM?

Acceptable (talk) 22:12, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There may not be very much difference at all - the difference is in the weight and streamlining of the body and (crucially) in the gearbox and suspension. It's the gearing that distinguishes high speed versus pulling ability - and the suspension that provides better cornering (at the cost of ride comfort, ground-clearance and off-road ability). However at low speeds, a sports car needs "pulling power" (torque - to give it a proper name) just as much as a truck does - so the gearing may be kinda similar in the lower gears...that's why weight is also so important. F=ma - Force (or torque in this case) equals mass times acceleration. If you can halve the mass - you get twice the acceleration. Consider that a farm tractor can easily out-pull a truck - and may well have a relatively puny 100hp engine...it's all in the gearing. Perhaps the most clear example is the Dodge Viper - undeniably a sports car - with a Dodge's V10 truck engine (See: Chrysler LA engine). The only concession to 'sportiness' in the engine was a switch from iron to aluminum for the engine block in order to save weight - the Viper weighs 3,400lbs - but the Dodge RAM 2500 (which you can buy with the iron version of exact same engine as the Viper) weighs in at 12,000lbs and can tow twice that. At four times the weight - it's going to be four times slower off the line. SteveBaker (talk) 02:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But in the case with the Viper, why can't it tow 24,000 lbs as well? Surely the difference between the frame and structural integrity of the two vehicles won't make that much of a difference? Acceptable (talk) 17:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt that the Viper could - primarily because the gearbox isn't set up that way - but also, the clutch is unlikely to be able to hold that much. Also, the Viper is so light (relative to a truck), that it's not going to have enough traction. SteveBaker (talk) 19:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is the difference between a gearbox geared for high-speed vs a gearbox geared for pulling ability? If one uses a large gear ratio, hence a larger overall transmission output torque, won't that maximize both speed and pulling ability? Acceptable (talk) 01:18, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No - think about it - if one turn of the engine moves the wheels only a small amount - then you have lots of torque - but not much speed. If you gear the same engine to move the wheels a large amount for every revolution of the engine - then the vehicle will go faster - but have less torque. Hence the needs for trucks and sports cars are very different. SteveBaker (talk) 02:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I was being unclear. By speed, I was referring to the car's acceleration. A large transmission output torque equals large towing capacity and acceleration. Acceptable (talk) 18:25, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for acceleration - you're right, you need lots of torque. The design of gearboxes for good acceleration is a subtle business. Too much torque in a light, front-engined/rear-wheel-drive vehicle - and you'll just get wheel-spin and not much acceleration - so it may be completely pointless to provide a really low first-gear ratio only to find that the traction control pulls off the power to avoid wheel spin. Also, the peak torque generally only happens over a fairly small range of RPM's - so you need gears that are sufficiently closely spaced to allow the driver (or the automatic transmission) to keep the engine in the middle of it's optimum RPM band. But if you use too many finely-spaced gears, the gearbox gets large and heavy and the car becomes hard to drive...so there are a lot of trade-offs there. So you might maybe find that the lower gears (which are for acceleration) are similar in a truck and a sports car - but the higher gears certainly won't be.
But acceleration depends hugely on the mass of the vehicle...and not so much the gearbox. As I pointed out before, the weight of the Viper and the Dodge RAM 2500 differs by a factor of four...so with even with identical gear ratios and identical engines - you'd expect the Viper to have about four times the acceleration - which means that the Viper's fairly impressive 4.6 second 0-60 time probably translates into a painfully lumbering 18 second 0-60 time for the RAM 2500 pickup.
At top speed, weight doesn't hardly matter at all - it's down to overcoming the air resistance and (to a much smaller extent), the rolling resistance. Getting the highest possible top speed means having a gear ratio that'll let the wheels turn fast enough at an engine RPM at which it delivers sufficient torque to overcome that resistance. The Dodge RAM's aerodynamics are sure to be a hell of a lot worse than the Viper - and given the heavy-duty transmission, differential, axles, etc - it probably has a much higher rolling resistance too. So pushing the pickup through the air requires more torque than the Viper - so even in the topmost gear, the pickup truck needs more torque so it can't possibly go as fast as the Viper because it needs that lower gear ratio.
It's also possible for the top speed of the car to be limited by the available gears. In my 2003 MINI Cooper'S (which has six forward gears) - you couldn't get up to it's top speed of 135mph in 6th gear because the engine's RPM at 135mph was just a bit lower than the peak of it's torque curve. To get to the car's maximum speed, you actually had to drop down to 5th gear to get that extra RPM and higher torque to push it through the air - but because the engine's RPM's are limited, the car wouldn't go any faster than 135 because 5th gear wasn't a high enough ratio. In the 2005 version of the exact same car/engine, they changed the gear ratios and thereby enabled the car to reach 140mph in 6th gear. However, that too was a compromise because by lowering the 6th gear ratio to provide that extra torque, they risked getting lower fuel consumption at more sane highway speeds because the engine would not be in it's optimum fuel efficiency band.
This is why car design is so complicated - and why cars differ widely in performance between types and manufacturers. Even something as seemingly simple as picking gear ratios ends up being a complicated trade-off between cost, reliability, weight, drivability, fuel-efficiency, acceleration and top speed. The difference between a good car and a great one lies in how those kinds of trade-offs are made.
SteveBaker (talk) 19:04, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So does that mean that the Viper can tow around 24,000 lbs (minus the difference in structural integrity), and hence, get the load moving, on first gear? Acceptable (talk) 02:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As Steve said earlier, Probably not. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 18:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But why? From his first paragraph: "So you might maybe find that the lower gears (which are for acceleration) are similar in a truck and a sports car - but the higher gears certainly won't be."

So the difference in acceleration is explained primarily in the difference in mass of the two vehicles. Since one would begin in the lowest gear and if the lower gears are similar, what - aside from the structural integrity of the two vehicles - accounts for the difference in towing capacity? Acceptable (talk) 21:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Towing requires more than simply making the load move. You need to keep it under control and stop it, too. Heavy-duty suspension and overall high vehicle weight tend to help with that. Friday (talk) 04:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with towing is that you also need traction. The Viper (being light) doesn't have anything like the traction of a Dodge RAM. Also, for a sporty car, you need really stiff suspension - but for a truck, you need something compliant enough to keep all four wheels firmly planted. So the likely consequence of trying to pull 24,000 lbs would firstly be that the weight on the tow hitch would lift the front of the Viper a couple of feet off the ground...but assuming we somehow ignore that - then it would be wheel-spin...failing that, the question of whether the clutch could take the strain of getting the car moving without burning out...failing that whether the Viper's body has the structural integrity to do it. If you actually did get the load moving, then controlling it would be virtually impossible - the momentum of 24,000lbs would mean that the Viper's brakes and steering would be almost entirely ineffective. The usual advice is that the load should weigh no more than half that of the towing vehicle (although when they claim that a 12,000lb Dodge RAM can pull 24,000lbs of load...they clearly aren't following that rule!) SteveBaker (talk) 13:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So the rated towing capacity of the vehicle is not how much mass the car get moving, but rather the maximum mass that the car can safely move? Does that mean that the Dodge RAM can tow more than 24k lbs of mass, albeit dangerously? Acceptable (talk) 23:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Backgrounds specifically for Photoshopping

Hello. Is there anyplace online that specializes in photos of locations specifically to be Photoshopped as a background? Let me make myself clearer: It is very simple to do a Google search and find scenic photos of just about anywhere. But almost always, those shots are composed to feature the locale itself. What I am looking for are photos that are composed and framed specifically so that someone could place a person in that photo and it would be at the right angle, distance, etc. (For example, in New York City a photo of the Empire State Building with the building a little off-center in the background, but looking straight down an adjacent sidewalk as if someone were standing there, but there isn't really anyone there. With that, I could take a photo of someone just standing anywhere, remove the background and align them with the background photo.) If such a site existed, it probably wouldn't be free, but I'm just wondering if anyone has heard of such things. — Michael J 22:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt there is any web site like that - but WikiCommons is an amazing resource for photos - I'd be quite surprised if you couldn't find something suitable. One big issue though is that you need to find a picture that has the same lighting as the picture you are trying to blend into it. It's really quite difficult to correct lighting differences - so picking two pictures that are close is a huge benefit. I wouldn't fret too much about the framing of the background image - you can always take one of the really high res images on Commons and crop it to make it look like the subject was off-center. Alternatively - find a photo that already has someone in the foreground and replace them. Then you have a photo that was posed completely naturally as a portrait. SteveBaker (talk) 02:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do keep in mind that many, perhaps most, of these images are copyright, though licensed under GFDL or CC-by-SA. With either of those licenses, you will have to release your work under the same license, and give credit to the author of the original photo. If you don't want to do that you'll have to look for photos that have specifically been released into the public domain. --Trovatore (talk) 08:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmadinejad vs. Mousavi

I'm a non-Persian trying to figure out the state of play in the upcoming presidential election in Iran. Our article quotes widely divergent poll results, and I'm wondering if there is anyone here in the know who can tell me what the realistic probabilities of victory the leading candidates Mr. Ahmadinejad and Mr. Mousavi have of winning, or point me to sources with some authority on the issue. Any help appreciated,  Skomorokh  22:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC radio 4 news interviewed an Iran expert (sorry, I didn't catch his name) today. He said that if asked two weeks ago he'd have been convinced Ahmadinejad was going to win, but that recently Mousavi (who he said had the support of intellectuals and students, and who he credited as being a particularly thorough organiser) had made great strides. They didn't ask for a prediction or odds, but the way he spoke it seems he thought Mousavi had a very realistic chance (although still with Ahmadinejad as the favourite, maybe). 87.114.167.162 (talk) 17:59, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, it was the PM program (the news before the news), which had a lengthy interview with Sadegh Ziba Kalam (a professor of politics at the University of Tehran). I'm listening again now on iPlayer - he says Mousavi enjoys support among women (in addition to those groups I mentioned above), and in general among more educated Iranians. 87.114.167.162 (talk) 18:12, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much, that is very helpful indeed, I'll be sure to look up the program! Mahalo,  Skomorokh  17:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]


May 30

How is a photo like this taken?

How is a photo like this taken? That is, with the solid white background and no evidence of a sheet or anything (except a little shadow)? Bubba73 (talk), 00:46, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are really three possibilities - one is that they really are using a very flat, white surface and very bright lighting. Another is that they used a fairly normal white background and then went in with a computer and painted out all of the imperfections - the third is that this is a computer model. It's really almost impossible to tell which of those things it is. However - because this is Wikipedia - we can scroll down a little and discover that: "(w:Audio-Technica w:shotgun microphone from the 1990's. Camera: Canon EOS 300D with Tamron 28-75 mm f/2.8 lens. Created by User:PJ and User:Piko.)" - so we know it's not computer graphics. We even know what camera and lens were used! However, the picture was 'created' by two people? That suggests that one person photographed it and the other cleaned up the image on a computer. But you don't have to guess - you can leave a question on User:PJ's talk page and just ask! SteveBaker (talk) 02:04, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - PJ hasn't edited for more than 6 months, so may not be around anymore. I think PJ and Piko are likely to be the same person. Bubba73 (talk), 02:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you think there isn't a sheet? A lot of photos like these are shot with a similar set-up to this, with a diffuse light and maybe slight over-exposure to blow out the background. With a small enough object you can even do it with a piece of A3 and a bounced flash. --antilivedT | C | G 03:06, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When I said "sheet" I meant "bed sheet". If I tried that with a bed sheet, it wouldn't come out that way. The type of setup you linked to was probably used. Bubba73 (talk), 03:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The image says it was taken with an f-number of 2.8, now I'm not much of a photographer but I think that is on the low side, meaning there would be a low depth of field. Whatever was used for the background is going to be completely out of focus, so as long as it is mostly white and well lit, it's going to look like a completely white field. --Tango (talk) 13:02, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Using a Light box. I made one myself - you just need the right type of bulb and paper/fabric. Bristol board is what I was told to use. ny156uk (talk) 08:20, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My wife, a professional photographer, confirmed that was indeed done with diffused lighting and a seamless sheet or piece of paper. Dismas|(talk) 15:28, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Bubba73 (talk), 15:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the trick is not to use cloth because at these magnifications it's fluffy and textured. Good quality paper or art board is probably the best bet. But you can fix a lot of imperfections with GIMP/Photoshop/whatever after the fact. SteveBaker (talk) 16:27, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, texture in cloth shows up, see File:StauntonPawn2.jpg. Bubba73 (talk), 16:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Buying a Bike

Where would be a likely place to buy a cheap adult bike (50 dollars or less)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.45.232.112 (talk) 03:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A garage sale Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:35, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A police auction? Clarityfiend (talk) 03:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Craigslist? Freecycle? Thrift store (Goodwill/St. Vincent de Paul's/Salvation Army)? A local used bike shop?-- 76.204.101.11 (talk) 04:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A bike thief. AllanHainey (talk) 16:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I presume the OP is looking for legal options. Otherwise, skip the bike thief and do it yourself. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 16:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

6E (triple wide) steel-toed leather work boots

My husband has had no success searching for this product, no longer in stock from Dunham (acquired by New Balance) and apparently unavailable through any other vendor found via Google. It's hard to believe there's no market for such a standard item in triple width. (He wears an 11-1/2, hardly a giant size.) Any advice on where to seek further? -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 10:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would these work? They come in 6E. // BL \\ (talk) 11:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed link. Jørgen (talk) 23:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

self-discipline for the lazy and uninspired?

I am a procastinator to the core. Sometimes I don't get things done due to the lack of mental energy or resources. Sometimes i am just lazy. Websites that help such individuals teach different methods. To be honest I have not tried any of them. Do you know any solution that is universally applicable to lazy people such as myself?. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.220.46.22 (talk) 10:46, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no one solution that works for everyone, but some that work for lots of people include working/studying/whatevering with others, so that you have a peer pressure to continue and not let them down. For example if you sign up to a gym, and agree to meet a friend there every week to work out statistically you will have a better chance of keeping joining. Also you could try making lists of jobs you have to do, and not allowing yourself certain privaledges until you have finished the list (this requires personal self-discipline though). Good luck. Prokhorovka (talk) 11:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My old studio master said, when I was faced with something that I was reluctant to do, "DO IT, get on with it, it's GOT to be done, do it NOW!" It worked for me 50 years ago and I still remember it and get it done, if it has to be done, whether I like it or not. Lovely feeling when its done too!--88.109.68.129 (talk) 12:41, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can personally speak for the effectiveness of "just do a little bit". Procrastination (at least for me) is inertia; it's the reluctance to start something (and the bigger the something, the greater the reluctance. The procrastinator part of me says "you can put this all off until tomorrow; it's not due for ages". The solution is to say to yourself "just do a little bit now, and put the rest off until tomorrow". So say I have to prepare my taxes, which involves sorting and inputting lots of receipts, calculating which (and to what extent) are valid business expenses, collecting a bunch of other info, and then filling out the forms. I'll say "I'll just put the receipts into month twelve envelopes, one per month, and stop then". That little task only takes maybe 20 or 30 minutes. Some of the time I really do stop then, but often that's gotten me into doing the task (and I remind myself that it's actually not that unpleasant a task, or that daunting) and I do a bunch more then and there. 87.114.167.162 (talk) 16:51, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Promise yourself to do say 20 minutes work on something a day. Use a timer. Then when the 20 minutes are up, you can enjoy the remainder of the day without guilt. Or more likely you will continue what you are doing for longer. When reluctantly studying, such as revising for exams, at first do a cycle of ten minutes work then 10 minutes break, repeat. Then when you are accustomed to this do 20/10 and repeat. You can also give yourself a pre-planned reward of some kind in return for yourself doing X amount of work. What I find difficult is to start some large detailed project which is not urgent, which may have unhappy associations for me - which in fact if I was prepared to be a feckless person I would never even start or think about. 78.144.254.133 (talk) 19:36, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to write a really good answer - but...Meh...maybe tomorrow. SteveBaker (talk) 18:34, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Tomorrow' never comes.--88.109.68.129 (talk) 19:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The suggestion about setting a timer and working for a defined period is a great one and is likely break the deadlock. I am going to write a book about overcoming the tendency to procrastination. Any time now.Edison (talk) 01:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MySpace

Does someone know how I can add Amy Winehouse (official profile) on MySpace? I tried to add her but I have to put in the last name or the e-mail address. Does someone know the word(s) for “last name” which I have to put in? — PsY.cHo, 13:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know next to nothing about MySpace, but does the last name "Winehouse" not work? That is her last name... --Tango (talk) 17:40, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
somehow advising anyone whose user name is "psycho" how to add a celebrity on MySpace rings loud bells with me...--88.108.222.231 (talk) 19:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was assuming it was short for 'psychotherapist'...WP:AGF and all! SteveBaker (talk) 01:53, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
@Tango: “Winehouse” is not correct.
@88.108.222.231 and SteveBaker: I do not understand your messages. — PsY.cHo, 08:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They're just joking about psychopaths stalking celebrities, don't worry about it! You're probably better off asking your question on MySpace, I don't think we have many MySpace experts here. --Tango (talk) 13:19, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mostly, when Ref Desk folks write things in small letters - we are joking in some way. Don't worry about it - it keeps us sane! Well, as sane as any group of people who answer questions from random strangers for no reward! SteveBaker (talk) 18:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is rewarding in itself! --Tango (talk) 19:04, 31 May 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Privacy of A-Level module results

Just wondering if British A-Level results for non-certificated modules (results from individual exams, not cashed in as part of a full qualification) can be looked up by third parties. Most importantly universities, and prospective employers. I failed several modules a few years ago which I am now repeating, and if possible I'd rather not mention in future that I ever took the failed exams. I am a mature student, taking exams as a private candidate, and it wouldn't be obvious from my employment history that I took exams before.

Will universities ask for my UCI number when I apply, so they can check previous results?

Can I also choose not to mention exams that I passed and certificated, but with a bad grade? Many thanks. 81.132.218.238 (talk) 14:48, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of what you mention on the forms, you don't have to put down your UCI number or any qualifications/exams taken which you don't want to disclose. Whether they can find out individual marks through some name search, however, I'm not sure - they couldn't until a couple of years ago, but some universities. I'm not sure whether:

  • They ask you for them, or whether they can find out without your permission.
  • Since they couldn't until a couple of years ago, whether they can find out the results of modules taken before this restriction was lifted, as yours seem to be.

--Joth (talk) 18:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you are applying for an undergraduate course in the UK, you will need to apply through UCAS, who state that you "must include all schools, colleges and universities that you have attended since the age of 11, even if you withdrew from your course" and that you must include "All qualifications for which you are currently studying or for which you are awaiting results". UCAS will check your qualifications with the awarding body - I don't know whether they will search to see whether you have omitted anything. Universities rely on the information which they receive from UCAS, and will not check these details themselves.
But bear in mind that almost any university will be interested in your latest grades (and your employment history), and will put little or no weight on grades from some years ago, provided you've made the grades now. If you're still concerned that previous poor marks may reflect badly on you, you can put a positive spin on it in your personal statement (you've decided this course is your future, you've shown the drive to retake these qualifications as a mature student, and your results/predicted results in them show your potential). Warofdreams talk 20:17, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eaten by boa constrictor

Are there any documented cases of a person being attacked and killed by a boa constrictor? Would a person of normal physical strength be able to fight off a boa, or would they likely be crushed to death? If the latter, would the boa be able to consume the unfortunate individual? --Richardrj talk email 15:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[1] says that an 8 to 10 foot Boa can kill an adult human. They don't so much crush as suffocate by wrapping tightly around neck, stomach and rib-cage. Every time you exhale - it tightens so you can't inhale again - so bit by bit you suffocate and don't have breath to shout for help...nasty! (for example) Many other sites say that there is no record of a human being eaten by a boa because their jaws are not large enough to accomodate our shoulders. But they certainly can and do kill people. There are a couple of sites that purport to show people who've been cut out of Boa's stomachs - but as far as I can tell, they are all faked. SteveBaker (talk) 16:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think adults being killed by boas is rare, but I've heard plenty of stories of children being killed by them. The advice I've heard regarding being attacked by a constrictor is to try and grab hold of either the head or the tail and uncoil them. Just pushing outwards isn't going to work, they are too strong, you have to start at one end and gradually free yourself. --Tango (talk) 17:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This farm labourer fought off a python with his phone [2]! BrainyBabe (talk) 22:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I missed the part about him fighting it off with his phone. He made a phone call, yes, but I didn't see where he hit the snake with the phone. Dismas|(talk) 02:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I used to work with a guy who had a pet 3+ metre boa (which he bought as a baby without realizing that she was going to grow that big - there's a life lesson there!) that tried to constrict his neck when he was sat on the floor drunk one night and trying to play with her/stroke her/whatever you do with snakes. That's how he managed to get her off of him. It seems that snakes do not readily subscribe to the master-pet dynamic. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 14:23, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Shel Silverstein says yes. jeffjon (talk) 13:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC) [reply]
Hm, some sources say farm worker, some say manager. But we have an article about Ben Nyaumbe. (Whether we should or not is another matter.) BrainyBabe (talk) 11:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 31

Checkmate.

Why is it that a chess game ends when it's possible for a player's king to be captured - rather than when it's actually captured? They are clearly equivalent in concept. SteveBaker (talk) 01:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's equivalent for perfect players, at least if you discount the clock. But it's not equivalent for real players — if you accidentally hang your king, you don't lose; you just have to take it back. --Trovatore (talk) 01:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, also, don't forget the stalemate rule — if your king is not under attack, but you have to move, and any move you make would hang him, you also don't lose. It's a draw. --Trovatore (talk) 01:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The question came about because I'm a notoriously terrible chess player - and I was teaching a neighbours' kid to play. I get him in 'discovered' check - but fail to notice - so I don't say "Check". He doesn't notice on his turn either...now it's my turn again and I finally notice that I can now take his king...but I can't because of the weird way the rules are written. SteveBaker (talk) 02:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think that's the intent. Hanging the king is an uninteresting way for the game to end, so it was disallowed.
Another possibility that I may have heard somewhere is that it was considered disrespectful, or maybe politically dangerous, to actually capture the king. Don't know whether that's true or just one of those factoids that floats around in my head sometimes. --Trovatore (talk) 02:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, given that you don't play that much chess, maybe I should explain the term: To hang a piece is to leave it vulnerable to capture without adequate compensation (of course there's no adequate compensation for the king). --Trovatore (talk) 04:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was because it would be deeply unwise for the creator of the game to give a king a game in which the objective is to kill the king, but our article says the actual term means "the king is ambushed," not "the king is killed." DOR (HK) (talk) 06:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered about that - whether there was some subtle political-correctness thing going on there. But I couldn't find a reference for that as a fact...and it's quite OK to kill the Queen. That's one reason I wanted to ask the question here. SteveBaker (talk) 19:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's more realistic this way - in a real battle once the King's death is inevitable the King will surrender. There is no point playing that final turn, so why do it? As for forgetting to say "check", apparently there is no rule requiring you to, and experts often don't (Rules of chess#Check), so the rules were violated when your opponent didn't move out of check. I'm not sure what happens then in a formal match, but in a friendly match you would roll the game back and let them make a legal move. I'm glad I'm not the only one that is terrible at chess - I have an excellent record of teaching people to play by playing a game with them and them beating me in that game, it has happened several times! --Tango (talk) 13:02, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In a formal game there is a time penalty applied to any illegal move, and touch-move means that if an illegal move was made with a piece that can be moved somewhere else legally it must be (or for opponent's pieces being captured).Julzes (talk) 21:10, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ouch! That hasn't happened to me yet - but it's usually not more than two or three games later that the newbie kills me. I don't know what it is about chess...I can usually beat most causal players at other games like that - I'm pretty good at "Go" for example (which I regard as a vastly superior game...perhaps for obvious reasons). SteveBaker (talk) 19:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever the original reason is, the rule has important and arguably interesting consequences. At the very low level, do you really want to beat the neighbor kid because he hung his king? Can't you wait until he doesn't notice a mate in one?
More interestingly, we have such things as that a player who has two knights cannot force a win against a player who has just his king, not because there is no checkmate, but because the disadvantaged player can arrange to be stalemated instead. Whereas if you have two knights and your opponent has his king and a pawn, you may be able to checkmate him, because in what would otherwise be the stalemate position, he can move his pawn. See two knights endgame. --Trovatore (talk) 20:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if this is a satisfactory answer to the OP, but it is a rule of chess that the king isn't captured in checkmate. It must have been that way for hundreds of years. As far as not seeing that a king was in check and making a move that doesn't get him out of check, the rule (except for speed chess) is that the last legal position (i.e. the one where the king is first in check) is restored and the game proceeds from there. Bubba73 (talk), 01:46, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can't capture the kind because it's not your turn, yet. The game ends in a checkmate when it's the turn of your opponent and he has one last chance to get his king out of the way and cannot do it. Friday (talk) 04:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's really not an answer to Steve's question. He knows the actual rules, as far as I can tell. He wants to know why the rules are the way they are. --Trovatore (talk) 04:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I realize that, and I'll see if I can find more info. But it is a rule. In American football, why is a touchdown worth six points? That is the rule. Bubba73 (talk), 05:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Paraphrasing from page 22 of A Short History of Chess by Henry Davidson, the earliest Sanscrit chess (about 1400 years ago) allowed the king to be captured, which ended the game. To avoid accidental and premature ends to games, the Persians introduced the warning of when the king is under attack (now "check"). That was probably 1200 or so years ago. Later the Persians added the rule about not capturing the king, to avoid accidental game endings and disputes over whether or not the "check" warning was heard. Bubba73 (talk), 05:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And Trovatore is correct in that checkmate does immediately end the game. Bubba73 (talk), 05:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it that a chess game ends when it's possible for a player's king to be captured - actually the game ends when it is impossible to avoid capture, not when it is possible to capture. Bubba73 (talk), 05:49, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

British Lions

Something I've wondered about, and I'd like the opinions of British people about this; is there some kind of local thinking or politics about the issue? The question applies to both rugby and soccer. Why do the British send individual teams to World Cup events? When the British Lions play, they are so much stronger. Surely a Lions team will have a better chance of winning a world cup? This applies even more so to soccer, where in the past so many talented players would have made a Lions team, instead of the stronger England team accompanied by the minnows Scotland, Wales, etc. Sandman30s (talk) 11:51, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of politics and posturing involved. It is rooted in each of the Home Nations individuality, even though England, Scotland, Wales and NI are not countries per se under the United Nations - we like to think we are and will fight to a certain extent to keep it that way. By forming a united UK or GB team for these sports, there is a perceived to be a high chance the ruling bodies would dissolve the individual national teams and force the fielding of a united team from then on, see for example United Kingdom national football team#London 2012. Hopefully someone may come along and give a better and more rounded answer. Nanonic (talk) 12:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think part of the problem is that England is such a large portion of the UK than a UK team would basically be the England team with maybe one or two players changed and the smaller Home Nations would end up without a team. --Tango (talk) 13:10, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the case, someone is not thinking straight. It's not the numbers that count, it's individual brilliance. I can think of some Welsh superstars in soccer (Ian Rush, Ryan Giggs), or really good Scottish or Irish rugby players that would have bolstered the English majority in a Lions team. Sandman30s (talk) 16:39, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are 12 Welsh, 11 Irish, 9 English and 4 Scottish players in this year's Lions tour. If I remember correctly, only 4 of the starters on Saturday were from England. /85.194.44.18 (talk) 16:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All else being equal (which, within the UK, it pretty much is), a larger country will, on average, have more brilliant players than a smaller country. If 1 in 100,000 people make good top level footballers, say, then England would have about 500 while the rest of the UK would have about 100. Chances are good that more players would be chosen from the former pot than the latter. --Tango (talk) 19:01, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well historically Wales and Scotland have had some fantastic individuals, but beyond a handful of players per generation the full squad would still likely be an 'England + a few others' squad. Based on Wales_national_football_team#Senior_squad there are 7 'Premiership' players - with only 3 of those being regular starters for the Premiership team they play in. Compare that to the England_national_football_team#England_squad where all but 1 (Beckham) play in the Premiership and most of them are regular starters for their Premiership club. Scotland_national_football_team#Current_squad is a bit harder to compare due to their top-flight division, but they only have 4 Premiership players in their squad. This doesn't mean that these countries don't produce great talent, but another telling factor is...the population of the entirety of Scotland and Wales is barely that of London. England has a much bigger 'pot' to choose from in general (obviously not all individuals in a country are eligible but you get the idea). I don't think there'd be much fan-based support of the idea, given the rivalry and tribalistic nature of football. ny156uk (talk) 17:10, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little surprised that the international sporting authorities allow it. We don't compete in the Olympics as separate countries...why the World Cup football people would allow it, I have no idea. As for the relative strengths of (say) an "England" team versus a "British" team - I suspect that we'd do best of all if we sent a Manchester United team (or whoever are doing best this year) instead. The fact that the guys all know each other so much better, have trained and played together for years and there would be no internal rivalries from players of different teams who's been playing as mortal enemies a month earlier...I think they'd do much better than a team put together from many separate teams just a short time before the important games. But I'm not a "sports person"...so I probably shouldn't be answering this at all! SteveBaker (talk) 18:29, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think we were kind of grandfathered in. It helps that we have separate domestic leagues as well (although I'm not sure Wales does). --Tango (talk) 19:01, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hong Kong, Puerto Rico, and the Faeroe Islands all have international football teams; Hong Kong, Cook Islands, Cayman Islands, Guam, etc, have international rugby teams. The home nations compete separately in the Commonwealth Games. In contrast the Olympics seems a bit more strict about its idea of what constitutes a national team. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 13:54, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well obviously the difficulty with Man U would be that their team is made up of multi-nationalities (along with all clubs just about - save for Atletico Bilbao who I think still play only Basque players). ny156uk (talk) 18:46, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We already have the FIFA Club World Cup anyway. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 00:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In all of these answers, one word jumped out at me: tribalistic. As an outsider, it's hard to believe that sports unity is that hard to achieve given that the once terrible political problem with the IRA/Sinn Fein has been over for years now. All UK nations accept the same queen, do they not? So surely the 'Home Nations' should see the light and unify sport? We South Africans need a challenge in the next Rugby world cup ;) Sandman30s (talk) 19:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Even at the Olympics, where there's a single team, the name of the team is a worry. It's not "United Kingdom", but "Great Britain", which as we all know is a geographic term for the large island that includes England, Wales and Scotland (but not Northern Ireland). People from NI can choose to play for the "Great Britain" team (even though they don't live in Great Britain), or the "Ireland" team (even though they're not necessarily citizens of the republic called Ireland). -- JackofOz (talk) 22:18, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And thus, hopefully, nobody kills anybody else. 80.41.31.27 (talk) 22:21, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its actually a bit more complicated that all that, and not really to do with the disparity of talent in each of the nations. Its really all about political power. The Home Nations have a disproportionate amount of influence at FIFA for the following reason: Together in 1947, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales were made "special" members of FIFA as a direct result of saving the federation from bankruptcy after the war. Part of the deal was that the 4 nations automatically hold 4 of the 8 votes on International Football Association Board - the powerful committee that pretty much decides the Laws of the Game - as well as automatic Vice-Presidency of FIFA (currently, Geoff Thompson). Since IFAB needs a majority of 6 to change anything, it means that the Home Nation, together, hold a veto over the will of the rest of the footballing world.

This influence, together with the simmering legacy of colonialism, pisses off quite a few of the other national associations at FIFA, and there has been moves afoot for a long time to remove the special status of the four nations. That hasn't proved successful (yet), but another tactic of those seeking change has been to argue that the four national associations should be merged into one (thereby reducing their number of votes to just one). The four associations have been very careful to keep themselves distanced from each other as much as possible, and they fear that merging together for the Olympics would seriously undermine that effort and lead to them losing their power. This is particularly concerning for Scotland, Ireland and Wales, which lack the financial clout and influence that the English Premier League lends the (English) FA. Scotland, particularly, has a record of influence in football administration that belies their relatively small size (consider people such as Andy Roxburgh, David Taylor and David Will), so its no coincidence they are particularly opposed to the idea. Expecting otherwise from administrators would be like expecting turkeys to vote for Christmas. Rockpocket 23:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone explain the use of the word "Lions" here for the ignorant non-UK people (e.g. me) in the crowd? There are a few listed at Lion (disambiguation) and I'm not sure which you're all talking about. Dismas|(talk) 00:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The British and Irish Lions is the name of a rugby team that is selected from the best players from England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales' rugby teams. The OP was using this nickname "The Lions" to refer to that concept of a pan-British/UK team more generally. Rockpocket 00:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The lion (or, more specifically, three lions) is a common symbol of England, for example appearing on the Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom. It's a little odd for it to be used for a British team since it is very much an English symbol, not a British one... --Tango (talk) 00:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Scottish Royal Arms also comprise a single lion (Or, a lion rampant between a double tressure flory counter-flory gules), and the traditional symbolism of the lion - strength, agility and bravery - seems particularly appropriate for a rugby team. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 19:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, both. Dismas|(talk) 00:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After reading United Kingdom national football team#London 2012 a conclusion was reached:
"A compromise was eventually reached between the four associations, whereby a squad of English players only would represent Great Britain. The FAs of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales sent a joint letter to FIFA stating that they would not participate, but that they would not object to England participating alone."
Isn't this like cutting off your nose to spite your foot? Surely the home nations could have allowed England selection of individuals to bolster their team? The pig-headedness of the politicians/management is scary. Sandman30s (talk) 09:09, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The fear is that by doing that for one competition they would be expected to do it for all and they want to keep their own teams for the World Cup. --Tango (talk) 12:09, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UK Trains

I've been noticing recently that in smaller stations - those with only two platforms and two tracks, not large stations with multiple platforms and tracks - trains always approach the platform from the right-hand side. This means that the trains are essentially driving on the left-hand-side, as on UK roads. What happens on the continent? --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 12:10, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They drive on the right. I've noticed before that trains seem to follow the left/right rule of the road of the country they are in. Fribbler (talk) 12:13, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Actually it's a bit more complicated. See here. Fribbler (talk) 12:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting link, thanks. It also reminded me that on the Liverpool Underground (UK), the trains approach from the left, making them essentially driving on the right-hand-side. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 14:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Paris RER and Metro operate in different directions. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 02:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(After clicking on the link above) ... what Fribbler said. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 02:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

verifying ISSN

I would like to verify the ISSN code of an online magazine. How can I do this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mosquitoyer (talk • contribs) 17:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The ISSN Register is available online through the ISSN International Centre. I'm unconvinced that access is necessarily free, however: see their products page. Angus Lepper(T, C) 17:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Our article "ISSN" says just that: "The ISSN Register is not freely available for interrogation on the web but is available on a subscription basis." - however, it does offer some other ways to get at the information - so read the article - especially the section entitled "Availablility". Another possibility might be to go to your local library - they may well have whatever subscription is needed to look up this information. SteveBaker (talk) 19:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

brightness of LED flashlights

How does the brightness of LED flashlights compare to traditional flashlights? (I know they use less battery power.) Bubba73 (talk), 17:39, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The white LED variety seem much brighter - I have both the single-LED 'pen-light' AA-battery variety and also a massive aluminium-cased, four-D-cell monster with about 20 LED's in it. Both seem to out-perform the incandescant bulb variety - although the LED light is much whiter than the incandescents - and that makes it tough to do comparisons 'by eye'. Also, it may depend on the manufacturer and cost...clearly the larger kind have a trade-off between more LED's or fewer LED's - giving more light or longer battery life respectively. However, I think that the convenience of never having to change another bulb means that I'll never buy another incandescent flashlight...that era is over. SteveBaker (talk) 18:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I bought a new regular Maglight two days ago and I was looking at the LEDs. They are a lot more expensive. Brightness matters to me but battery life is not much of a factor. Bubba73 (talk), 18:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They are certainly more expensive...but for me, reliability was the main thing. When I need a flashlight, it's generally because the power is out - or I'm stuck beside the road with a broken car at night or something. Replacing batteries is generally easy - but I find that the bulbs in incandescent flashlights don't last long - even if they aren't being used much - and vibration (such as when I keep the thing in the trunk of my car) kills them very quickly. So that's why I use the LED kind. The price difference seems much greater in the smaller flashlights - the big ones, not so much so. SteveBaker (talk) 19:28, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]


An LED flashlight could certainly be designed to put out more lumens than an equivalent incandescent flashlight, but among the ones I have seen the emphasis seems to be equivalent brightness with much longer battery life at a higher cost. That said, I have bought some little LED flashlights with multiple LEDs which are amazingly bright. The non-LED flashlights do not give Lumen output at all, in general, but LED ones often do. Edison (talk) 01:29, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the LED flashlights advertised watts. I think 3 watts was the largest I saw. A 3-watt bulb isn't that bright, except in a flashlight with it focused, it probably is. Bubba73 (talk), 02:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Corporations in the US

Can a company in the US be a corporation if just one person is in control, eg. the founder has all control no employees or members of the company can kick him out and there are no stockholders? --Melab±1 ☎ 21:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. It varies by type of incorporation, and by state, but in general a corporation needs a small number of directors who take legal responsibility for the company. They're appointed by the stockholder(s); if a single party owns all the stock then they appoint all the directors. While they control the company, they're creatures of the stockholders, Things get much more complex when the founder sells a significant state to others, particularly venture capitalists. Some such experienced (some might say tricksy) players are occasionally accused of manoeuvring to dilute the stock controlled by the founder, sieze majority control over the board, fire the founder, and then run the business for themselves. Sand Hill Road has more than its share of folks who'll do this for you, help you avoid it being done to you, and fight the legal cases when it's done. 87.114.167.162 (talk) 22:55, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know you asked about the US, but if anyone is interested - In the UK such companies are called "single member companies" and the law makes special provisions for them. They can certainly exist, though. Strictly, there would be a stockholder, somebody has to own the company (assuming it is "limited by shares", there is an alternative generally used by non-profits), but you can have just the one shareholder. --Tango (talk) 23:21, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

National Graduate School (U.S.) ?

What about National Graduate School? To be exact, what does the USCG refer to in the [bio or Thad W. Allen] ("In 2007, Admiral Allen was awarded an Honorary Doctorate of Science from the National Graduate School.")? --Scriberius 21:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't know how reliable it is, but the Urban Dictionary has a definition. --Tango (talk) 23:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The National Graduate School of Quality Management. According to their promotional literature, Admiral Thad Allen, Commandant of the USCG, endorses it: "I not only support this program, I encourage it."

USCG. 152.16.16.75 (talk) 23:25, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Scriberius (talk) 07:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What country has the world's largest fishing fleet?

What country has the world's largest fishing fleet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.233.192.226 (talk) 23:52, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Depends - to some extent - if you mean by number of registered boats, or by size of catch. Currently China is the worlds largest fishery producer, second placed Peru, followed by Japan. However, that doesn't necessarily mean they have the most registered vessels, as many fishing boats sail under flags of convenience these days. The last true national fishing fleet was that of the Soviet Union before its dissolution. That was the largest in the world, at the time, and was run like a navy. Rockpocket 01:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 1

Widows and widowers on family trees

I recently started building a family tree with some software. Among all the marriage status options is "widowed." Now, of course this would apply to a couple where one is alive but the other had died. But what about if both have died? I've been putting "widowed" for all deceased couples, but should I really? Should I perhaps put "married" if the surviving partner never remarried, but has since died?--The Ninth Bright Shiner 01:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might depend on how complex your tree is. For example, if it showed people's status as at any particular point in time, then "widowed" might be an option, for the period after the first one died, up to the time the second one died (assuming they didn't die together). But if it shows only their status as at now, as most family trees I've seen do, than neither party of a couple both of whom are dead is widowed any more, but both are deceased. The fact that they may for some period in their lives have been widowed can be deduced from their own death date and that of their spouse. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see. As far as I can tell, the marriage status is only the most current status. So, you'd stick with "married" if they have both died, but the widow/er never remarried?--The Ninth Bright Shiner 02:08, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, no. A dead person has no marital status as far as I'm aware. They're both simply "deceased" now. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, but there's no such option under marriage status, only the options married, divorced, separated, widowed, engaged, partners, friends, annulled, unknown, and other. Yes, I'm being very nitpicky.--The Ninth Bright Shiner 02:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see. If those are your only options, I guess the general principle would be: (a) If they're living, put their current status in. (b) If they're dead, put in their status immediately prior to their death. Therefore, for the couple we're discussing, for the one who died first, it would be married, and for the other, it would be widowed. -- JackofOz (talk) 13:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't the idea to use that only to explain why someone remarried? SteveBaker (talk) 13:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's an odd question in a way. A person throughout their lifetime could have a whole series of marital statuses: single (everyone starts out that way), married, divorced, (re)married, widowed, (re)remarried, separated, reconciled, separated, divorced .... The status immediately prior to their death is not necessarily representative of their predominant status (the one they had for most of their life). But I can't see how else to do it in this situation. It's at least a consistent basis, rather than cherry picking the status you think is most representative in each case. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the family trees I've done, I've always put in married if they've been married (and to whom), and if there's a divorce, it really doesn't compute. Divorce won't affect any children from the union, genealogically speaking. If there's space in the program (there usually is) for 'additional information or resources' - it's where you cite source material - you can put in 'Divorce decree issued dd/mm/yyyy, Generic County, State of X.' All that about 'engaged, partners, friends, annulled' is BS, quite frankly, and doesn't affect the core genealogy in any way. Yes, it's nice to know Aunt Peggy and Aunt Sue were partners. It won't export out as a standard GEDCOM, although that could change for future standards. For right now, for ease of conformity through the program, I'd put in married when and if married, leave it blank otherwise. If there's children resulting from the union, those kids will get their own pages and their own step on the chart. 'Additional information' sections are really where to put information like: Aunt Peggy was engaged to Jack Smith in 1908 for a few months, then Jack Smith was killed in a mining accident. Her marriage to Tom Doe will be on the chart, with the kids, but her civil partnership with 'Auntie Sue' in the later years, since it's *not* legally classified a marriage, should go in as 'Civil union filed dd/mm/yyyy in Generic County, State of X', but only after putting in 'Divorce decree etc' into 'Additional' where applicable, otherwise you mess it up for future researchers.

68.47.208.67 (talk) 21:35, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How was the fastest speeder caught?

Inspired by the above discussion about the fastest speeder. Our speeding ticket article claims: The fastest speeding ticket in the world [...] was supposedly 272mph in a 75mph zone. The car was a Swedish-built Koenigsegg, which was involved in the San Francisco to Miami Gumball 3000 Rally.[2] The cited reference isn't much of a reliable source.

My question: How was he caught? A cop car can't catch him. A spike strip would, I imagine, cause a spectacular and deadly crash. A helicopter could keep up, but as much as I'd love it if the local PD had one equipped with an electromagnet and lifted the guy off the ground, it sounds unlikely. Tempshill (talk) 05:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How many Koenigseggs are there haring across rural Texas at any given time? Given the local authorities would be well aware in advance that the rally would be passing though I'm pretty sure that, if it really happened, the cops could have set up a speed gun as the cars entered the county, and a checkpoint as they exited it to issue to the ticket. I don't see to much of a problem with mistaken identity. Rockpocket 06:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They don't need to stop the car, just read the license plate, they would have waited until he slowed down or stopped before arresting him. --Tango (talk) 11:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the things mentioned above, there is, of course, always the option of the trusty old road block. Even if you're speeding like crazy, when you see that the road up ahead is blocked and there's nowhere to go, chances are you're going to stop fooling around unless you're planning a particularly spectacular suicide. Of course, setting up an efficient road block when the speeder is moving that fast requires that the cops know what they're doing and are directed efficiently. (Not that the guy is doing a constant 272mph, of course.) And, of course, this assumes that the guy is actually evading capture. It's entirely possible that once he saw the flashing lights and heard the siren, he decided to give up, reasoning -- quite correctly -- that his chances of actually evading capture even if he manages to slip away are bad, and he'll get charged with all sorts of other unpleasantness if he doesn't surrender. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 12:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It would be one hell of a chase if he didn't reason though, wouldn't it. And one hell of a suicide if the cops did manage to roadblock him. Prokhorovka (talk) 14:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the cops have too many helicopters that can do 272 mph either, though I have seen signs in Colorado saying that airplanes do a radar check for speeders. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 14:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All rank speculation! I'd ask for cold, hard facts, but of course the event may never have occurred. One note to 65 immediately above: Those signs about airplanes monitoring car speed are pretty common, but the airplanes are not doing radar checks; an officer looks out the window and stares at your car as it passes a big stripe painted on the side of the road; he starts a stopwatch; when the car passes another big stripe, he does some math, notes that you're doing 90mph, and radios this fact to a squad car, who pulls you over. That said, I don't think I have ever talked to anyone who got a speeding ticket in this manner. Tempshill (talk) 15:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The helicopter wouldn't have to match the top speed, just be close enough to its average speed to stay close enough not to lose the car. A helicopter can cut corners, too, which would help a little. --Tango (talk) 16:44, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am assuming that a car driving at 250+ mph does not encounter many corners, or you would only need to tell the hearse where to pick the guy up. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 18:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's one of the reasons the average speed will be significantly below the top speed. They could be fairly gradual corners, like those found on motorways/freeways, anyway. --Tango (talk) 18:22, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not that it makes much difference - but the actual speed he was doing was 242mph - not 272. The Koenigsegg's top speed is 245 or so. I agree that he'd have to be going in a dead straight line to do that - the Koenigsegg doesn't handle all that well at relatively sane speeds. It's the only car I recall "The Stig" ever crashing on Top Gear...for precisely that reason. The show made a big deal over how adding a spoiler would fix that - Koenigsegg did that, and now offer it as an optional extra - but the extra drag knocks the top speed down to (IIRC) ~220mph - so we can be pretty sure that the speeder didn't have one. In all likelyhood, the Texas police could have followed him and pulled him over in the next twisty section - or perhaps someplace where the traffic built up a bit. I've done the Texas police driver training course several times now - and they make a big point of that. Their Crown Victoria squad cars can be outrun by many other street cars - but they're trained to keep their distance and wait for some corners where their (hopefully) superior training will let them catch up. Having seen one of their instructors drive a Crown Vic around their test track - and beat the crap out of my best time in a MINI - I have no doubt that they'd catch the Koenigsegg eventually. Also - failing to pull over when there is a cop on your tail is a pretty serious offense - once the driver saw the flashing lights (way, WAY back in his mirror!) he'd probably have stopped anyway. SteveBaker (talk) 19:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is off topic, but I'm pretty sure that failing to pull over for a cop with his lights on is a surprisingly minor offense. I have been unable to cite a source for this claim in the last five minutes of searching, other than noting that OJ Simpson was not cited for his low-speed chase; so I will close with some advice for the Koenigsegg's driver for when the police officer eventually pulls him over: He will not be reasonable at first ... but no matter. Let him calm down. He will want the first word. Let him have it. His brain will be in a turmoil: he may begin jabbering or even pull his gun. Let him unwind; keep smiling. The idea is to show him that you were always in total control of yourself and your vehicle -- while he lost control of everything. Tempshill (talk) 20:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How did he lose control of everything if he succeeded in getting the guy to pull over? Sounds like he won... --Tango (talk) 21:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, in the Texas penal code there's two things you could be charged with:
  • Sec. 38.03. Resisting Arrest, Search, or Transportation. (Class A misdemenor - $4,000 fine - up to a year in jail)
  • Sec. 38.04. Evading Arrest or Detention. (Class B misdemenor - $2,000 fine - up to 180 days in jail)
I suspect 'evading arrest' would most likely apply here because "resisting" implies more actively trying to get away. Dunno - is $2,000 and half a year locked up in a Texas prison "surprisingly minor"?
Indeed I would not, but you're going to have to cite a source that speeding without pulling over is any of the above offenses. The cop has not announced an intention to arrest you, for example. Tempshill (talk) 18:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
SteveBaker (talk) 03:13, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't he just have been caught by a speed camera? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.251.196.62 (talk) 14:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No - there are no speed cameras in Texas. SteveBaker (talk) 16:46, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Do you know the reason why? Rockpocket 00:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because any politician who even briefly entertained the vague possibility of doing it would be voted out of office before he could blink? Well - maybe. We do have traffic-light cameras though. SteveBaker (talk) 04:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which is the best bow?

I was going to put this in Science, but it seemed better off here.

I've searched bow and archery for a bit, and have found the composite bow of the Mongolian style absolutely stunning. At the same time, there're simply so many other bows of different qualities (the aforementioned being a wonderful asset to any archer on horse), I should ask a question hopefully not too alarming (!!!): Which is the best type of bow for field hunting? This with regards to range and to some extent sound, but with weight on draw weight enough to kill an animal of course, but also a man wearing plenty of clothing (though I am not prepared to ask for anything to go through kevlar), and a size that permits relatively swift maneuvering. I've ruled out the longbow, I mean. If you can help me with this before I have to turn to an archery site and forum, I'd be all sorts of happy. If anyone could sport links that detailed the use of bows in military special forces, that too ought to help. 62.128.252.85 (talk) 10:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will depend on what animal you are hunting. The ideal bow for turkeys will not be optimal for deer as an example. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 14:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The bow hunters I know use the same bow for turkey and deer. I'd recommend going to an archery shop and trying out different things. BTW not sure why you're asking about kevlar, but it does not provide good protection against pointed things like arrows. Modern compound bows are quite compact and are pretty much standard for any kind of hunting. Friday (talk) 16:49, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brambles and guinea pigs

Does anyone know if it is safe to feed brambles (blackberries) to our guinea pigs? We are in the UK if that makes any difference to types of bramble. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 12:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On this site [3] it suggests giving them orange, melon and leafy vegetable as a source of Vit C. I guess bramble is not going to harm them but the fruit might be a bit acidic and cause bowel looseness. Richard Avery (talk) 13:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would be surprised if feeding them one as a treat once in a while would do any harm - but clearly that shouldn't be the majority of their diet. SteveBaker (talk) 18:44, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm only interested in some bits and pieces. I'm as interested in the possibility of them getting the leaves that are offcut as anything. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 20:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Try it and see. guinea pigs make great research animals. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 19:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
groan DOR (HK) (talk) 07:32, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"State Minimum" milk prices....

I'm hoping someone can explain my observation from this weekend. My confusion probably stems from the fact that I don't know the true menaing of a "state minimum" milk price, and its calculation and implications. I live in Pennsylvania, USA, and over the weekend, I purchased a gallon of skim milk at a local WaWa convenience store for $2.89. Later that day, I went into a grocery store, and above the milk display case was a sign proclaining "Milk sold at state minimum prices", but the price for a gallon of skim milk was $3.18. So, my question is, if the grocery store is selling milk at "state minimum" price, which apparantly was $3.18/gallon, then how was WaWa able to sell the gallon for $2.89? I did some googling, but all I got were statements of federal and state regulations, as well as articles proclaming that dairy farmers were either overpaid or underpaid, depending on who you believe, but no plain-English explaination of what the heck a "state minimum" milk price is. Any help would be appreciated! --Zerozal (talk) 15:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing that the state laws only apply to full-fat milk...but I don't know for sure. SteveBaker (talk) 18:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a journalist who has covered the milk pricing situation in Pennsylvania for many years, maybe I can shed some light on this. (I'm not sure if this is considered OR or not since it was published under my name, but this is the RD so it doesn't matter.) Anyway, the Pennsylvania Milk Marketing Board sets the retail minimum prices each month. There is a whole table of prices based on the type of milk, the size of the container and the region of the state. This month's table is available Template:PDFlink on the bottom half of the first page. (The other stuff has to do with prices paid to farmers, and adjustments made to milk shipped out-of-state.) According to this month's pricing table, the minimum for a one-gallon container of skim (non-fat) milk is $2.67 (Northeast Pennsylvania) to $2.89 (Philadelphia area). Something seems to be wrong at the other store claiming "state minimum." I'm guessing you're in the Philadelphia area, because that's where WaWa has most of its stores. The whole milk price for that region is $3.17, so maybe someone at the other store doesn't know how to read the pricing regulations correctly.
There is an ongoing dispute over exactly what criteria the PMMB uses to set these prices, as well as the prices paid to farmers. Items such as production costs, transporation costs, product availability, mark-up to distributors and other factors are considered. (One thing that I think is important to mention is that, in Pennsylvania anyway, farmers get only a small fraction of the retail price. The last story I reported had farmers getting the equivalent of $1.39 a gallon. That was back in November, and isn't quite the same because that is based on unprocessed milk. I say "equivalent" because farmers' prices are calculated by hundredweight (cwt), not gallons.) — Michael J 21:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Another issue, and I don't know if this applies to Pennsylvania, is that some States mandate a minimum markup, rather than a minimum price. So the retailer takes the price it pays the wholesaler, and has to add at least 10%, for example. If one retailer can get the item cheaper through a different wholesaler it can sell the item for less, but the other retailer still can claim "state minimum price" even though the same item may be cheaper somewhere else. -- 128.104.112.106 (talk) 22:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much to both of you. This certainly sheds some light on the subject! --Zerozal (talk) 14:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm surprised they have government regulated pricing in the US of A, it seems more like something the Communists in eastern europe would have done. I was going to suggest that the cheaper milk may be a loss leader. 78.151.147.255 (talk) 23:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We gotta protect the poor from low prices! —Tamfang (talk) 03:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Engine braking enforcement

On the US freeways, one can often see signs saying that "engine braking ordinance is strictly enforced". I've always wondered how exactly this is being enforced, as I can't imagine an easy way of detecting engine braking short of the police car immediately following the violator just at the right moment. So, how exactly does it work? Or is it just FUD?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:16, June 1, 2009 (UTC)

Could you mention what state you are discussing? I live in the US and can't remember ever seeing one of these. Tempshill (talk) 15:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One could almost as easily say, "I can't imagine and easy way of detecting speeding short of the police car immediately following the violator...". Everyone here knows that, despite posted speed limits and warnings about strict enforcement, the vast majority of the time one can exceed the speed limit without being caught. So why not speed all the time? The one-in-a-hundred occasions when there is a police car around the bend is sufficient deterrent.
The jake brake ('compression brake', 'engine brake') on a truck has a very distinctive, very loud noise. In off-highway, municipal traffic, a large tractor-trailer sticks out like a sore thumb. If a police officer has a line of sight to the truck, and he hears engine braking, it's pretty trivial to identify the offender.
I suppose that – in principle – a police department could operate a 'gravity trap' (think 'speed trap') to try to catch violators as they descend a grade; in practice I've never heard of such a thing. Our article on the jake brake notes that attempts are being made to upgrade Australian traffic enforcement cameras to detect illicit engine braking. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen signs requesting that truckers not use engine brakes in residential neighborhoods but never have I seen these signs on the freeways... Dismas|(talk) 15:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to Jake brake#Legislation the signs are are freeway off-ramps, so refer to the residential area you are about to enter, not the freeway itself. --Tango (talk) 16:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The ones I saw are definitely on the freeway itself; often placed right after the state or county border lines. The states I've seen these signs include Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, and, if I remember correctly, Wisconsin.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:17, June 1, 2009 (UTC)

Converting Grades into equivalent Marks

I gave my plus two exams this year (ISC board, India), and while applying for admission to different colleges, found a few of them asking for my marks in Physics and Chemistry in the tenth standard board exams. The trouble is, in our board,for the class X exmainations, they give the aggregate percentage of science (I got 90%)and give grades for the individual subject (I got A in Chemistry, B in Physics and A in Biology). And now I have no idea how to convert the grades into marks, because with biology thrown in, I have no way to give them an accurate score. Also, it seems unfair to write 80% instead of grade B, when it can be anywhere form 81 to 89..... Googling this doesn't seem to help either... Can someone help me with this?? Thanks in advance! 117.194.232.197 (talk) 16:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Generally you shouldn't do any conversions. Give them exactly the information you have and let them work out how to interpret it. If you are unsure, phone them and ask for advice. --Tango (talk) 16:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, give them the table (sometimes written on the back of official documents) that says A=90-100%, B=80-90% or whatever, and tell them you got a B in whatever. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 18:08, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GM Bankruptcy

How a company like GM, which turns steel, plastic and rubber into cars, could possibly go bankrupt? I don't think recession is a reason.--V4vijayakumar (talk) 17:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer: A massive drop in sales, due in large part to the recession. Longer answer: Due to the recession and lack of availability of credit, people stopped buying cars (although, I believe, there had been a long term decline in sales from before the recession, which didn't help). Their revenue dropped, but their overheads stayed about the same (I think they made some cost cutting measures, but obviously not enough), so they made massive losses. Due to the credit crunch and the recession in general, banks were not willing to lend them money to get through it, so they have no choice but to accept a government bailout to avoid them simply running out of money. Some of the bondholders rejected the bailout plans so they had to go into bankruptcy protection which allows the court to force through the plan. --Tango (talk) 17:30, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
GM was buying large amounts of steep, plastic and rubber to make cars, but then they could not sell them all, so they paid for the materials, and did not get the revenues. They also had to pay their workers, and their electric bill, but their revenues were not enough to support it. They also owed a lot of money to lenders for money they borrowed earlier, much like a house loan. Their bills were so high, and their income so low, that they could not pay the lender enough, so no one would loan them money. This resulted in bankruptcy. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 18:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The big factor that hurt GM was "legacy costs" -- pensions and healthcare for retirees. GM used to employ 600,000 people, most of whom were covered under union contracts that now seem generous. Many of those people are still getting pensions and healthcare benefits from GM. But since the 70s, GM has shrunk dramatically. It now has less than half of the market share it used to have in the US. Each GM worker supports about four retirees and retiree spouses. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 18:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does this mean the company is going to close down and not be there in a few months? 148.197.114.207 (talk) 18:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No -- it has filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11, not liquidation. It is restructuring under court supervision. It will use bankruptcy protection to get rid of expensive liabilities and should emerge from bankruptcy as a "new," smaller GM owned mainly by the US government.
This BBC News article gives the breakdown as: "[T]he US government is set to take a 60% stake in GM, the Canadian government is due to own 12.5%, with GM's unions having 17.5%, and bondholders 10%." The European and UK branches of the company are being bought by a Canadian firm, Magna International, so GM is certainly going to end up quite a bit smaller than before. The unions and bondholders are getting shares in exchange for writing off debts owed to them. Existing shareholders get nothing at all (which is normal for a bankruptcy that ends up with not everyone getting paid - the shareholders are always at the bottom of the pecking order). --Tango (talk) 20:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The 12.5% (or "about 12%" as I've seen it given elsewhere) to be owned by the Canadian government is wrong. It's 2/3 of that amount, or about 8%, with the ogovernment of Ontario owning the other 1/3 or about 4%. --Anonymous, 06:32 UTC, June 2, 2009.

Oil companies could try to bail out. don't ask me, why oil companies. --V4vijayakumar (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oilers love the gas-guzzling Hummer! DOR (HK) (talk) 07:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The recession was the final nail in the coffin - but too many years of letting the unions drive wages and benefits through the roof - plus too many dealerships demanding too many concessions in order to (essentially) compete with each other - plus car and truck designs that nobody wants to buy - plus increasingly serious competition from overseas. Take all of that grief - and dump a recession on the top - and guess what happens? SteveBaker (talk) 18:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Like a worrying number of major US corporations, their management subscribed to the theory (instilled into them in business school bootcamp) that their job, above all else, was to grow the company. So they borrowed very heavily, and used this money to expand (particularly internationally). This all works great until a) people stop buying cars and b) no-one would lend them more money (and want what they lent back). The weird thing about the credit crunch is that it's not just bad prospects that couldn't raise money - there simply wasn't much capital around for anyone. That alone isn't enough to drive them into bankruptcy, and there are still quite a lot of cars being sold. GM's particular troubles were its product line (heavy on recession unfriendly large vehicles, light on the smaller, lighter, and cheaper vehicles people buy when money is tight) and the burden of its healthcare and retirement schemes (wherein the company took on much of the burden of insuring its employees that in Europe and Japan are taken by the state - and did a better job of pretending those costs weren't so high than it did of actually keeping them under control). It's also fashionable to blame GM's problems on the poor quality of its product, but (while GM is generally rather far down in quality tables) their stuff is much better than it used to be (and Renault, Citroen, and Fiat usually score rather worse than GM for quality and reliability). In addition I've heard one commentator blame another factor - that GM and Ford compete very aggressively for the market share for fleet (particularly rental) cars in North America. They offer Hertz, Avis, etc. such steep bulk discounts that the big rental companies only offer their cars. GM and Ford hope that (in addition to this being a nice little earner, even with the big discounts) people will like their cars when they rent one, and will buy one when they have to replace their own. But the rental companies buy the dull nasty near-bottom versions, so the renters infact get the impression that GM cars are nasty sluggish plastic junk (whereas if they'd been rented a mid-to-top range one they'd have liked it much more). But, with all this analysis said and done, GM isn't the only car company in serious trouble, and that includes the Japanese manufacturers who do make small, reliable cars, run their employee benefits schemes much better, and don't run the company books like they're having a spree at Vegas. Maybe GM will be the largest to formally go either bankrupt or into chapter 11, but they're surely not the only large auto company that'll either be wholly or partially nationalised or dismembered altogether. 87.114.167.162 (talk) 18:47, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An oil company, or any corporation or investment group with deep pockets, could "bail out" GM by purchasing it — but nobody has wanted to do this for the past several years, presumably because of the very high costs that GM carries compared to its revenue (and the future trend of that revenue). Under US Chapter 11 bankruptcy law, a judge can authorize the canceling of any contracts and any debts that the company has with its unions, suppliers, dealers, anybody — and many of these contracts and debts are indeed going to be canceled, and the company will "emerge" smaller and more likely to be profitable. This comes at a cost; many suppliers are being left in the lurch with invoices that will never get paid, so they in turn are going to declare bankruptcy and avoid paying their debts to their suppliers, ad nauseum; and many workers of course are going to end up earning less, and earning lower benefits, than they used to get while working at GM. None of this shedding of debt or obligations could reasonably have occurred without a bankruptcy, and hence the conclusion that a bankruptcy was the only way out for the GM corporation itself. Tempshill (talk) 19:55, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe they did try and avoid bankruptcy by getting voluntary agreements to cancel debt, but some of the bondholders refused to do so and it was necessary to get a court order (whether those bondholders did end up getting more that way, I don't know). --Tango (talk) 20:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bermuda Triangle

Why aren't we able to resolve the myster of Bermuda Triangle? In todays arena where we are able to reach moon and create our own spy satellite or even a syp plane then why arent we able to solve the mystery revolving around Bermuda Triangle ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahuldaroraa (talk • contribs) 17:55, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Bermuda Triangle. It's unclear that there's anyting to be "solved" with respect to this area. Friday (talk) 18:04, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yep - it's pretty clear that this is a case of observer bias. Anytime anything happens in the area of the triangle, people immediately yell "OMG! Another Bermuda Triangle Mystery!!" - but when something happens out side of that area - they don't see that as a proof of the contrary hypothesis. Also, the many authors of books concerning this "phenomenon" don't agree on what area is delimited by the "triangle"...they seem to adjust it's size and position however necessary to prove their theories. No - there is nothing to prove. SteveBaker (talk) 18:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a point of interest, Flight 447 was not even close to the Bermuda triangle, but it has disappeared without a trace.
Even so, people are already talking about how Flight 447 is "proof" of the Bermuda triangle. (They don't know, or don't care that Flight 447 was thousands of miles away.) Fools. APL (talk) 19:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Shows what you know! The Bermuda Triangle is obviously just bigger than you think. Adam Bishop (talk) 22:29, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Various books and articles have made the "triangle" include most of the Atlantic Ocean, to include any mysterious disappearance. Edison (talk) 23:55, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that there are several spacecraft that were sent to Mars and never made it, I think the Bermuda triangle is far larger then previously thought, maybe even the size of the solar system. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 16:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you should include supernovae and black holes in your theory - because compared to a few ships and planes... SteveBaker (talk) 16:44, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

shopping

1 Any ideas what I can get my sister for her 19th birthday? I don't know what clothes she would like, or her size, and I think she has bought every book she wants, and has the next few preordered off the internet. I haven't been at home much recently, so I don't even know what she already has.

2 Also, where might sell a wire for plugging an ipod into a computer. Tesco, Curry's and WHSmith's didn't have any, and there are no computer shops around.

148.197.114.207 (talk) 18:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like you're in the UK. I suggest you go to Lush [4] and get her something nice and smelly, and organic and handmade too! What's not to like! --TammyMoet (talk) 18:48, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(please excuse the massive sexism that follows, but when one is divining the personality of someone one hasn't met and who hasn't been remotely described, one must resort to type or stand mute) Chicks dig (for whatever reason I can't fathom) candles - particularly scented candles (which make their homes smell like Mexican brothels) and fancy candles (the kind with swirly patterns or glitter in them, that generally would look suitable only in the castle of an outlandishly camp vampire). So combine the two and get expensive smelly swirly glittery candles. You naturally don't think any local shops sell them, because your inferior male eyes lack the special cells necessary to see such things, but ask any woman of your acquaintance and she'll have chapter and verse on the comparative merits of a huge range of backstreet candle emporia (useless boutiques that take up valuable retail space that would be better used selling engine parts or jockstraps...). Failing that, repeat the above stuff with "chocolate" substituted for candle (Hotel Chocolat is expensive but well appreciated). Combining the two (chocolate-scented luxury swirly candles) does, however, run the risk of your sister spontaneously exploding. 87.114.167.162 (talk) 19:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Word of advice. Those two-for-a-pound scented/glittery candles from your nearest pound shop (or whatever the US equivalent is) just don't cut the mustard - as I once discovered to my cost. Even though they (to me, at least) look and smell exactly the same. Likewise, flowers bought from a petrol station rarely make a positive impression with women, unless they're just for the vase on your nan's kitchen table or something... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 19:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Where did the OP ever claim to be male? 194.100.223.164 (talk) 09:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe other people's families don't work like this, but I've usually found people like to be asked if there's anything in particular they want (unless you already know of something you want to get them). That way, you can get something that will be really appreciated. She might have something specific, or general, in mind that she'd like and cannot afford/justify buying. 80.41.123.51 (talk) 19:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If she is at all technical, get her a Pico C USB key and a pretty necklace to put it on. They are available in chrome, nickel, or gold, and in 4GB up to 32GB, so you can spend as little or as much as you want, and they are so small they look like a pendant. Put a collection of family pictures or music on it. -Arch dude (talk) 22:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So, avoid the Pound Shop or Dollar Shop for the candles, but look in there for the Ipod cable. Some of these shops have a large range of cables and accessories. Look for a USB adaptor pack, which will have a USB cable and various different size USB plugs to use with it (around $7 in Australia). One should fit the Ipod.KoolerStill (talk) 23:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A gift is meant to reflect your affection for the person. She may like candles and chocolates, but the wrong kind just show you are getting her a generic present, as suggested not only by people who don't know her, but people who don't even know you. Ask someone she lives with for -- maybe your parents - for a hint. Buy, or make, her 19 of something. (19 homemade cookies!) I like the idea of the USB key, loaded with music and photos you have chosen for her. You might get more ideas from The Good Gift Guide, co-authored by Susannah Constantine. BrainyBabe (talk) 11:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Re question 2: I think I recall seeing them in Poundlandin the past, but I do not know if they always have them in stock. 78.151.147.255 (talk) 23:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to give her something very unusual that will be remembered for a long time, how about a lama? DOR (HK) (talk) 07:43, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

why do restored historical aircraft often have silver shiny bodies?

File:Curtiss P-36A Hawk.jpg

Why is it that restored historical aircraft tend to have shiny silver metal bodies (like those on the right), and not the real camo paint jobs like the plane on the left?92.251.169.45 (talk) 22:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When a gazillionaire spends millions of dollars for a shiny new toy, he likely expects it to be ---shiny. Museums also like shiny things to hang from the ceiling and attract visitors. Edison (talk) 23:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would not be surprised to learn that both those paint jobs are authentic. Wikipedia has vintage photographs of both aircraft with their shiny aluminum finish. (And also photographs with other paint jobs, so clearly not all aircraft of a certain type had the same paintjobs.)APL (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
File:Curtiss P-36 Hawk.jpg
For US aircraft of WWII vintage, you tend to find that later aircraft used bare metal instead of painted camo. In some cases this can be ascribed to overwhelming air superiority (particularly in Europe) -- late-model P-47s, P-51s, and B-17Gs (among others) abandoned camo because the Luftwaffe was effectively destroyed. Additionally, paint is heavy. A coat of paint on a B-17 weighed 500 pounds]. Paint on a B-29 might weigh double that. Knocking a half-ton off the takeoff weight of a bomber significantly improves the range or payload it can manage, factors of critical importance in the Pacific theater where the -29s operated. — Lomn 02:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 2

Troll (Internet) vs. human troll

Is there any difference between internet troll and calling human being a troll. Because if I personally calling names of human troll, this is likely to be a form of harassment behaviour. Why at internet we can call people a troll, but students cannot personally call a teacher troll.--69.229.240.187 (talk) 01:15, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In what way is the teacher in question anything troll-like? Bus stop (talk) 01:26, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Trolling is a specific type of disruption, and not just being a general obnoxious person. A troll is someone who asks a question or starts a discussion for the sole purpose of stirring up people's emotions. Trolls say things with the goal of getting you to type long, time wasting, angry responses. Only the internet really owes itself to trolling because of the particular way communication happens on the internet. It doesn't really apply to live-and-in-person modes of communication, like teacher-student interactions. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there are similar things that can be done in real life. Instead of calling someone a troll, they're usually said be "being difficult". The troll label, as it's known on the internet, doesn't really cross boundaries though. Dismas|(talk) 03:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it is just starting to. 86.4.190.83 (talk) 13:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are certainly real life trolls, but calling your teacher a troll to their face seems as unwise as calling them anything else other that "sir" or "miss" or whatever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.54.169 (talk) 14:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does your teacher live under a bridge? If so, they may be a real life troll, but I'd still suggest that you don't press the issue with them. TastyCakes (talk) 21:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Calling someone a troll in real life does mean something different to calling someone a troll on the internet. If you call someone a troll in real life, it implies that they're lacking in social skills and personal hygiene (like calling someone a Neanderthal), rather than the internet-specific meaning of someone who is deliberately annoying and argumentative. Steewi (talk) 01:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Or simply ugly. —Tamfang (talk) 06:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How long is Euclid Avenue?

How long is Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH? The article does not say, and I would like to know, with a citation that can be used in the article. --DThomsen8 (talk) 01:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to the ODOT straight-line diagrams, US Route 20 hits Public Square 17.45 miles into Cuyahoga County and reaches East Cleveland at mile marker 22.94. So the length of Euclid Avenue in Cleveland is 5.49 miles. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A sexual matter

I know this is ver sexual, but im just really curious. Yesterday i was looking at my vagina bent over through a mirror and i noticed just under my vagina opening and before my butt, i have this ball of white stuf almost looks like a pimple but when i squeeze it nothing comes out. but it keeps on growing in size. i was just wondering is it supposed to be there, its located where my perineum is.

if someone could answer my question that would be sooooo GREAT !!

thank you .

Wikipedia doesn't give you medical advice for good reason. I recommend you seek professional medical advice/attention. Prokhorovka (talk) 07:18, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Go to the doctor, immediately —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.54.169 (talk) 14:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm surprised that no one asked for a photo! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.68.129 (talk) 14:22, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Ref Desk has a very good record of handling questions of a sexual nature in a mature and respectful manner. --Tango (talk) 14:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We can't give advice, but we can say that ain't right! —Tamfang (talk) 07:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Illegal File Sharing

If buying a DVD, reformatting it, and then sending it digitally to someone else's computer is illegal, wouldn't NASA be under breach of the law for doing this? Or have they paid some sort of fee that allows them to do that? Is there such a fee? iTunes and other organizations that legally provide copyrighted material can do it. I'm interested in how they can. Do they pay a regular fee to each publisher they stock, or to each individual artist? Or is it more complicated than that? --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 12:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is a very big "if". If someone brought a CD and you copied it onto their MP3 player because they had no computer then in many countries that would not be illegal. -- Q Chris (talk) 12:26, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Chances are nasa bought a copy of the reels (or the hard drive type thing the movie is stored digitally on) specifically for this purpose, or got a special licence from the publisher. Incidentally you cannot format a DVD. They are read only, and cannot be modified short of destroying the disc. Gunrun (talk) 12:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you can, see DVD-RW
I assume he was talking about buying a dvd with a film on, which would be the non writable sort. Although the explanation below mine seems more likely. Gunrun (talk) 08:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The word "reformatting" comes from the article, and I suppose it means "transcoding". -- BenRG (talk) 14:29, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) For the original question, your "buying a DVD" analogy doesn't hold up -- there is no DVD of the new Star Trek movie to buy. If some enterprising NASA engineer had stolen the movie, then yes, that would be illegal. However, I find it quite likely that an unusual-but-legal arrangement was made -- possibly NASA purchased the film as a theater would. Possibly the distributor donated a copy for the PR value. It's quite unlikely that the process was anything like a standard consumer transaction, though. As for iTunes and the like, they certainly make some form of payment in order to legally sell the content, just as a brick-and-mortar store buys CDs in order to re-sell them. The details of such agreements are generally trade secrets, though I would suspect that Apple makes most payments to the various publishing groups rather than to individual bands. — Lomn 12:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
@Q Chris: That's not true - it's a very tiny "if" and an unusual take on the word "many". The Berne convention on copyright has been signed by all of the countries in blue on the map at right. In all of those places, it's illegal to copy music from a CD and give it to someone else.
In the NASA case, it's pretty much certain that they got permission from the copyright holders...which I'm sure was granted easily since for them, since the publicity of having actual astronauts watching the movie is well worth it.
For iTunes and other companies like that, yes, there is some kind of agreement with the copyright holders. It'll be heavily negotiated and probably include some up-front payment and a per-copy royalty. I doubt they deal with individual artists though - they'll be going through the publisher of the work who in turn will sort out royalty payments to individuals where applicable. I doubt there is a "one size fits all" solution yet - the various online retailers have such different business models that it would be impossible to come up with a single way to do this. That's one of the key factors preventing online movie sales & rentals from taking off as it should. SteveBaker (talk) 12:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Q Chris: Please don't intersperse your comments into the middle of someone else's reply - it's extremely disruptive to readability. I've moved the tail of my comment back up to where it belongs!SteveBaker (talk) 16:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. If you copy a CD owned by someone onto a different media also owned by them, without keeping a copy or giving one to a third party I don't believe that this infringes the Berne convention. If the astronauts purchased a DVD and it was transmitted to them and nobody else I think it would be the same situation. -- Q Chris (talk) 13:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's no clause in international copyright law that gives you the right to rip your own CD for your own use, as far as I know, let alone on someone else's behalf. The record companies won't sue you for it, but that's because the lawsuit would be a PR disaster, not because they couldn't win the case. -- BenRG (talk) 14:29, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, there is some case law in the United States which suggests you can do exactly that. Space shifting or format shifting a recording – coverting it from one format to another – for personal use was explicitly upheld in RIAA vs. Diamond. That case confirmed that ripping a CD to your hard drive and copying the resulting file to a portable media player was entirely permissible. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This would be analogous to being entitled to make one copy of software (either to floppy disk or to CD) for security backup purposes, ie in case the original gets unusably damaged. There is then nothing to stop you using the copy for your actual re-installations, and keeping the original in pristine unused condition. There is no "sharing" with others involved. KoolerStill (talk) 22:37, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's no codified legal right to make backups either. Some software licenses grant you that right, but it comes from the licensor, not from the government. Copyright is the exclusive right to make copies, not just to share them. There's a long list of exceptions to that exclusive right, but none covering backup copies for personal use. (I agree that that right should exist, of course.) In the U.S. the Audio Home Recording Act effectively makes it legal to copy audio recordings onto an analog or digital audio recording device for noncommercial purposes. Again it doesn't say anything about sharing. So as far as I know it's perfectly legal in the U.S. to dub a whole album onto a cassette tape and give it to a friend. That applies only to audio recordings, not movies or ebooks or any other digitally encodable works, and it applies only to a limited set of recording devices and media, which excludes, for example, MP3 files on computer hard drives. The ruling in RIAA v. Diamond was that the Diamond Rio was not an audio recording device under the terms of the Act, which simply means that that section of the copyright code doesn't apply to it. Nothing in the rest of the copyright code gives you the right to copy songs onto the Rio. It is clear from the decision that the judge felt that people ought to have that right, and I'm sure that's a widespread feeling these days, but there's a limit to how much judges can bend the law to reach the conclusion they think is fair. It would be better if this right was explicit in the copyright code, and currently it's not. -- BenRG (talk) 11:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Andree Creuzot-French decorative artist

I'm struggling to find any information on Andree Creuzot, a French decorative artist. There was an article published about him and decorative art in the 'Paris ABC School of Art, Painting And Drwaing Course' (English Translation-1982) but I cannot find any other articles relating to Andree Creuzot. The information is for my Cambridge A-Level Art examination and I need to know his history, e.g. birth date, and any other information anyone can provide! I have to write a 3 500 word related study and I'm desperate!˜˜˜˜ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.2.64.46 (talk) 14:26, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

French Wikipedia does not have an entry for him, either. However, a Google search on the name (alternatively spelled Andre Creusot)brings up many references, in French. The results with the word "illustrations" also in them seem to be referring to the person you are seeking. Many of the pages have a Translate This Page link on them. But most appear to be references to books he illustrated, with no biographical data. A general work on French Decorative Arts for the period may make some mention of him. KoolerStill (talk) 23:13, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

suitable hat for south asian men

Baseball cap gives a hip hop artist looks. Fedora type hats is not my taste as i am in my mid 20s and about 5'7" tall. Please suggest me a decent looking hat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.220.46.22 (talk) 15:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Decent looking' is a mtter of personal preference and style — we can't give you an absolute answer. You might try looking through the list at our article on hats; perhaps something there will appeal to you. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:06, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Pork pie hat might work. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 18:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you could try a cowboy hat. A musician of south asian descent named Neal McCoy, wears one on a regular basis. --Lost Fugitive (talk) 19:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just don't be one of those idiots who wears a stocking cap when it is 95F outside. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 20:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
mm he appears to be Filipino/Irish, not South Asian. Clearly that changes the hat situation completely. TastyCakes (talk) 22:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think all hats that do not serve a purpose are at least a little silly or pretentious. So unless you're looking for a hat to block the sun, keep your head warm or obscure your receding hairline, the choice will really be dictated by the image you wish to portray. Trucker? Tough guy summer tuque wearer? Melodramatic artist? I don't recall knowing or seeing many Indians that wear hats (other than turbans, of course), and so don't have any ethnicity-specific comments. TastyCakes (talk) 22:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a flat cap or a newsboy cap? If you're a dark South Indian, black and brown probably won't look any good, so you'd want white, cream, grey, or another lighter colour. Steewi (talk) 01:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I beg your pardon, I Should have mentioned that the sole reason for hat is sunglare. sunglasses may not be a good idea as I wear powered glasses.

Rules of chess without a universe

if the universe disappeared would the rules of chess still exist? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parosa2 (talk • contribs) 15:37, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would it really matter? Livewireo (talk) 15:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Where would the universe go? Bus stop (talk) 15:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make the sound of one hand clapping ? Gandalf61 (talk) 15:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

articles relevant to this question: A priori and a posteriori, Platonic idealism, Ousia, Category of being. --dab (𒁳) 15:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Easy to argue this point. Once a notion has been discovered by man, it exists and cannot be made to unexist. Hence countries can disarm their nuclear weapons, but the concept cannot be uninvented. However, if there was no man to ponder said notion (or even animal etc as per your question) you could argue that it's as if the notion had never developed. Particularly if you considered that the disappearance of the universe could arguably mean the disappearance of time and therefore no sensible chronology (something didn't exist and then was discovered) continued to make sense. In a way, your question is a refinement (and much funnier version) of the classic If a tree falls in a forest, which has obvious weaknesses. --Dweller (talk) 16:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of any place for the rules to be stored or described - no. Of course not. Rules are like algorithms or data - they are information. Information theory (specifically Landauer's principle) demands that the system be capable of a change in entropy - not possible in an empty universe...or a non-universe. Worse still, if you consider there to be no universe - then there is no time - so how do you know that chess was invented yet? If you perhaps consider that the rules of chess always existed and that someone merely 'discovered' them - as opposed to them being 'invented' or 'created' - but then you'd have to say that all rules for all possible games 'exist' - we just haven't found them all yet. If you take that position then you should probably become a full-time philosopher so that I can more efficiently mock you! :-) SteveBaker (talk) 16:29, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The rules of chess only exist in human minds or in human artefacts such as books. If they disapeared, then the rules of chess would disapear also. 78.151.147.255 (talk) 23:49, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An alternative viewpoint, as SteveBaker pointed out, is that the rules of chess are simply one of an infinite number of possible game rules that can be described mathematically. From that point-of-view, the rules will exist as long as mathematics exists. Whether mathematics would exist if the universe didn't exist is a much broader question. Note 1: We can continue to offer possible opinions and links to relevant articles, but please try not to start a debate. Note 2: I have changed the section title from "question" to make it easier to find. « Aaron Rotenberg « Talk « 06:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thats like having infinitely many monkeys typing for an infinately long time, or like the library of the tower of babel short story by I think Borges, where every possible sequence of letters etc is recorded. Such things do not exist, so the answer is still no. 89.243.113.64 (talk) 19:58, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Akon

What were the songs sung by akon in the closing ceremony of dlf indian priemer league in southafrica 2009? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.245.190 (talk) 16:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know for sure that he sung Smack That... beyond that i don't know...Rkr1991 (talk) 13:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't commercial airplanes have parachutes?

I can understand that in sudden catastrophic events parachutes would be useless. Also, opening the doors at certain heights would cause massive decompression.

But where an aeroplane is in trouble and may have to make a risky landing, or it is likely that it is going to crash, why do they not have parachutes for passengers to evacuate? I'd rather take my chances with a parachute, even if untrained, than take my chances with a mountain. Anyone have any thoughts?

Thanks 82.22.190.200 (talk) 19:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because an untrained parachutist would be extremely dangerous, and a 'risky landing' would surely always be a better risk than trying to co-ordinate the safe release of some 300+ parachutists from a 747. The risk-to-reward would be hugely in-favour of a risky-landing. The pilots are trained for difficult landings, the average passenger is not likely to be trained in parachuting nevermind doing their parachuting in a high-pressure (mentally) and high-stress scenario. That added stress would make the job 10x more difficult for an experience parachutist never mind your average Joe. ny156uk (talk) 20:26, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

not to mention that 300 parachutes would weigh a lot, meaning that the aircraft could not fly as efficiently, not to mention that it would not be a trivial thing to store that many parachutes. Statistically speaking, aircraft accidents that would require a parachute are very rare, so the cost does not equal the risk, even if you assume that the parachutes would be used properly. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 20:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But there are whole plane parachute systems. [5] Bus stop (talk) 20:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The planes these are made for are tiny in comparison to the main commercial passenger planes. TastyCakes (talk) 21:01, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some good points there, thanks. Perhaps the term "risky landing" was not really appropriate, thinking more for scenarios where it is clear that the plane is in serious trouble. In terms of training, does it take much training to jump and pull a chord? Basic training could be included in the safety talk the flight attendants provide. But I take your point about the numbers of passengers and the nightmare of evacuating them all under that level of stress and possibly violent movements of the aircraft. I dunno, I just think I'd feel happier knowing I have the option. Maybe I'll sneak on my own and a door pick. 82.22.190.200 (talk) 20:44, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Think of how long it takes to get off the plane at the gate, when people are just grumpy. Airplane accidents almost never develop over a nice span of five to ten minutes that would allow the everybody to put on a parachute, file quietly to the rear (only those doors might be suitable) and jump, not hitting the tailplane (which apart from the ill effects on the passenger, might take the plane down more quickly), hopefully with enough altitude for safety but not so much that they'd be dead from exposure or hypoxia before they made it down. Airplane accidents generally happen suddenly and quickly, and the plane may be doing things that are best done with the passengers and crew belted in. Also, mountains don't obligingly stand aside until you're ready; either you avoid the mountain by maneuver, or it arrives as a surprise. The only large airlines that you could jump from with a reasonable degree of success were the Boeing 727, the MD-80 and the Douglas DC-9, which had airstairs under the tail, and all but the MD-80 are out of service. See D.B. Cooper for the 727 escapade. Acroterion (talk) 20:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
DC-9s do survive in service in penny numbers, although I think the majority are cargo conversions now. The last 717 was delivered in 2006, so perhaps there are a number of 727s out there as well. Incredible as it may sound, there is a highly risky procedure on large airliners to open the doors to bleed out smoke. The only time I can think of where it was used is South African Airways Flight 295. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 21:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Boeing 717 is actually a lot more modern than the 727. --antilivedT | C | G 10:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(*looks*) I stand corrected. I assume I got lost amongst the whole renaming from MD to Boeing. Thank you! Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 11:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think as a result of the DB Cooper incident all 727s and DC-9s had their ventral doors configured to be inoperable in flight, although that could obviously be reversed. According to Airliners.net [6] no 717s were built with ventral airstairs. DC-9s linger at Northwest Airlines, but I suspect Delta's going to park them as they merge operations. I doubt there are very many 727s in regular passenger service anymore. Acroterion (talk) 21:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the difficult part of parachuting is making sure you are up the right way when you open the chute. If you a spinning out of control when you open it you'll just get tangled up and it won't work. You could try some kind of static-line system, but that would slow things down even more. A standard evacuation takes several minutes, I think, and that is with people jumping onto an inflatable slide one immeadiately after the other. A parachute evacuation would take significantly longer and the risk would be significantly greater than even a very rough landing, so you would only want to do it if you were certain people wouldn't survive the crash. I doubt there are many situations in which parachutes would be useful. --Tango (talk) 20:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(EC) I think we are forgetting that the average 747 travels at speeds of over 500mph, and having 300+ people jumping out would be a hazard both to them and to the plane itself, as one or more of them is bound to hit the wings or the tail, and this is even with a coordinated jump (which would never happen anyway, because the in-flight safety video would be too long). We are not talking about an airdrop over Arnhem here, with trained troops jumping out of propeller planes. These are jets. and who's going to strap a parachute onto a baby, chuck it out, and hope it lands safely? Best just to leave it to the trained pilot to get us all down safely. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 21:10, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're forgetting that they also tend to fly at 30,000 feet. Recall what happens when the plane depressurizes! People would probably freeze to death and suffocate before they got halfway to the ground. SteveBaker (talk) 04:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the idea was that the plane is obviously going down and there was no way of getting it to fly properly. By that stage, it would be much lower than 30,000 feet, and decompression/freezing/suffocating would not be a problem. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 09:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can think of a situation that would make people want to jump. cheers, 10draftsdeep (talk) 21:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC) [reply]
This might be worth considering, just for the entertainment value of watching the cabin crew on the taxi-out, pantomiming putting on a parachute, clipping a static line, jumping out a door, avoiding the tailplane, floating down to god-knows-where and making a landing. Then they'd do another one for if you had a baby. That's way better than where they show you how to buckle a seatbelt. Me, as long as the pilots are in the plane, I'll stay in the plane. Franamax (talk) 22:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The trouble with all of these crazy schemes (including the earlier one about having GPS and radios in life vests for example) is that the cost is INSANE, the amount of weight it would add is just nuts - and the number of times it would be potentially useful over (say) the last 50 years can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Almost all airline accidents happen soon after takeoff or landing - or on the ground...the ones (like this recent Air France crash) that happen while the plane is flying straight and level tend to happen so quickly that nobody can do a damned thing about it. By far the most important thing we could add to help passenger safety would be a simply silvered mylar smoke hood with a filter for you to breathe through. Such things have been known to be useful for at least 20 years - and would cost just a couple of bucks each and could be tucked into the magazine storage pouch - and would have saved hundreds of lives over the years. For all of that cost/benefit, we still don't have them as a legal requirement. The problem is that airline travel is already amazingly safe. Storing 250 relatively heavy parachutes on a commercial flight in the hope of mitigating a risk that's MUCH less than one in a million - is flat out stupid...it's a waste of money - a reckless waste of fuel and increase in global warming hazard - and in the next 50 years, it would be pretty surprising if it saved even one life. The airlines could save VASTLY more lives by donating 1% of the money that would cost to (say) a children's hospital someplace. We're all thinking about the Air France disaster - but if (as it appears) the plane broke apart at 30,000 feet over mid-Atlantic without the pilots even being able to turn on the radio and say "SOS", the parachutes would have been completely useless. The only thing that would have saved those people was to somehow avoid the thing blowing up or falling apart in the first place...and if we ever figure out what it was - you can be sure it'll get fixed. SteveBaker (talk) 04:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the word they didn't get out was mayday rather than SOS (edit) and I also wonder whether it was that they didn't have time to make the emergency call or whether with the problems the plane was apparently having they didn't have a working radio --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 02:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the many good points made above, here's yet another reason. Putting on a parachute isn't a matter of "slip it over your head and tighten the strap around your waist" as in the lifejacket safety lecture. The thing is a bulky backpack or chest pack and you have to strap yourself to it so tightly, and so correctly, that the straps will support your entire weight (whereas a lifejacket only has to keep your head above water). Even if you had a few minutes available, would you be able to do it correctly, the first time, in the space available in a typical airline seat, with people and walls bumping your arms and not even enough room to stand up straight? No, you would not! --Anonymous, edited 04:40 UTC, June 3, 2009.

True, another plan could be to fit all planes with passenger ejector seats (with individual buttons so you can get rid of the boring idiot sitting next to you - oh, sorry, that was my wife), or make the whole plane out of the same indestructible material the black box is made of, and fit air bags. Not practical, but it'd make a great Disney movie. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 04:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know you were joking, but you don't actually want to plane to be indestructible like the black boxes (even if it could be done without making the plane too heavy to take off). That would mean that all the energy of the collision is transferred to the passengers inside (it has to go somewhere), it is much better if the plane crumples (as the landing gear is designed to do, I believe) to absorb the energy. --Tango (talk) 14:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I was joking, but the serious side of me had to add the bit about airbags. If they work in cars, why not planes? If you had enough of them on all sides of each passenger, we might have a solution, if the fuel doesn't explode, and so long as the plane had enough space for people and three airbags each. Of course, a ludicrously impractical idea, but then, so is the idea of parachutes, which is what we are discussing. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 18:16, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is an excellent thread. --Dweller (talk) 08:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone might want to add here a link to the interesting research about how much safer planes might be if all the seats faced backwards, towards the rear of the plane, in the event of a forced landing. Apparently there are psychological reasons why they don't do this, although the increase in survivability is clear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.101.134.43 (talk) 09:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you can provide a link, that would be helpful. In the meantime, I would just like to say that if I suffered from backward-motion-sickness, I'd prefer to be facing front, rather than blowing chunks for the whole journey before exploding in a ball of flames. On a more serious note, without a link, I can't see how forward-facing or backward-facing seats can have any kind of survival advantage over each other in a plane crash. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 10:43, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is that you would be pushed into the seat's cushion during the sudden deceleration, instead of hitting the next seat in front. You'd also have a soft shield against any debris flying from the plane's nose. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 11:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I might go look for a link, but I do remember an airliner mechanic explaining this to me, and saying all military aircraft are like that. He also demonstrated that a thumped aircraft seat has a tendancy to go forward, and the weight of the person behind striking it could crush the person beneath. I don't recall ever hearing of this happening in an actuall accident, though. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 11:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"All military aircraft" are certainly NOT like that. Here is an example of a C-17 where the troops are facing to the side, and here is another example where they are facing front. --Zerozal (talk) 14:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've heard that before, including about military aircraft doing it (it's certainly not all military aircraft, but maybe the ones designed to carry out a similar role to commercial airliners, transporting 100s of people from A to B). I don't think there are generally many injuries caused by being thrown forwards during the crash, though. Generally there are two types of air accidents - ones where everyone gets out safely with a few minor injuries and ones where you have a loss of all hands. Backwards facing seats wouldn't help in either of those cases. --Tango (talk) 14:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a link to a source that argues rear facing seats on a plane are safer and why: http://archive.mailtribune.com/archive/2001/august/080501n1.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.101.134.43 (talk) 15:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The rumour I heard is that the best thing to do is get a seat near the tail, as, apparently, 9 times out of 10, it breaks off during a crash, and drastically increases your survival rate. This is a horrible topic for me, because I'm getting on a plane next week! In any case, rumours and schemes and ideas as good as they might seem, it would be best to just stick with what we are doing already, and that is trusting the trained pilot to get us from A to B. Plane crashes only make the news because they are rare. Car crashes happen every day, in their thousands, so they are not 'news'. Don't worry about it, get all you can from the free food and drinks, and look down on the world and see all the ant-like people rushing around while you go off on holiday, that's what I say. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 18:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds dubious. If the crash is severe enough for the plane to fall apart, I would expect the loss of all hands, regardless of where in the plane they were. --Tango (talk) 20:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We aren't supposed to be passing on rumors here. If you have actual statistics on how many people survive airplane accidents or where in the plane they are, please cite sources, otherwise don't speculate. Remember that you can't go by what gets covered in the news media: they have no reason to treat every accident equally. --Anonymous, 04:11 UTC, June 4, 2009.

I know we are not here to spread rumours. If you read the post again, you will see that I was against the idea. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 05:32, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UK Stop and Search

I am aware this treads the line about asking for legal advice, but I can assure this is a hypothetical question. If I'm walking down the street in the UK and a policeman walks up to me and says "I'd like to Search you, please Stop", what are my rights? Can I refuse? Prokhorovka (talk) 21:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stop and Search | Home Office. Also see Liberty: Your rights - Stop and Search. In short, the answer to your second question is 'no'. Angus Lepper(T, C) 21:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I wish this and all the other opposites to freedom in the UK could be listed in an article - they need making manifest. 78.151.147.255 (talk) 23:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps - but Wikipedia isn't a political weapon. This is one of those cases where people who feel strongly about it shouldn't be editing an article like that. I doubt you'd be looking for the cases where your freedom isn't being infringed upon and documenting those just as carefully. SteveBaker (talk) 04:12, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All I meant was a straight list of new developments in survelliance in the UK, like CCTV, recording of emails sent, and many other things. I cannot think of a suitible title. 78.146.98.203 (talk) 14:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a matter of interest, and I know one would get it in the neck if one actually tried this, do they have to accept your description of oneself as English, Indian, Chinese, Nigerian or whatever independent of what one looked like? Is ethnicity basically uncheckable self description? Dmcq (talk) 06:58, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To be perfectly honest, I don't think it matters what ethnicity you claim to be. If they want to look in your bag, they will look in your bag, not trace your family tree. It's a different matter if you give a false name and address, though, as that can easily be checked. Other than that, you can say whatever you want. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 09:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They have to note down ethniticity to check whether they are discriminating. If everyone said they were black that would hurt their figures. Dmcq (talk) 12:23, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone, the links in particular were great. Now if I'm every stopped, thanks to Liberty I'll know that what they can and cannot do is intentionally vague! Prokhorovka (talk) 09:45, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jigsaws for right-handers?

I just tried out a brand-new electric jigsaw on some 1/4" fine-grain sanded plywood, using the scrolling setting. I made a test cut both convex and concave, to check the operation and roughness of the cut edge, following the instructions for "good-side-down", using a blade that looked about right for the cut (not a metal blade, not a ripping blade). I'm right-handed and I cut with the finished piece on the right and the offcut on the left. Not sure if that's how R/H-jigsawers do it, but that was my instinct. The workpiece was clamped through cloth, close to the cut; the offcut was a ~2" triangle, unsupported, weighing perhaps an ounce.

On inspecting the offcut, I noted that the bottom-side was indeed a perfect cut and the top-side had the (burr? swarf? splinters?) rough-cut on it. Also, the brand-new blade had left red paint all along the edge/side of the material. This effect was uniform from the start to the end of the cut i.e. it didn't start an inch or two into the cut.

On unclamping the workpiece, I was met with a surprise. The edge was perfect on both top and bottom and there was almost no paint left on the side of the material. I'm left to conclude that the difference is down to one of my cutting technique; the offcut side was unsupported; or the blade is designed for "right-hand" cutting.

So my question is: are jigsaw blades designed for this method of use, workpiece-on-the-right? Since my Mom will be doing the actual cutting (wall-thingy for her grandson) and she's left-handed, it's a matter of interest to me. Thanks for any help and I recognize this could be a weird one, even for en:wiki! Franamax (talk) 21:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the blade (any type of blade) edge on, you will see the two edges are identical. The blade mounts centrally on the saw. So there is no "handedness" in it. The effect you achieved would be from your putting sideways pressure on it, unintentionally, trying to keep the blade clear of your marked line, as well vibration from the lack of support for the offcut. A left-handed person would be doing the same thing. For a larger item, or a large odd-shape offcut,especially in thin material, the vibration factor would be considerable. It would be best to rig a support on each side, for example clamp the offcut to a length of timber supported between 2 chairs, even if it involves re-clamping it in new positions a few times. KoolerStill (talk) 04:23, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are three different machines that people call 'jigsaws': the Coping saw, the Scroll saw and what Wikipedia calls a Jigsaw (power tool) - but I'd classify as a lightweight "Reciprocating saw" - which is what you are presumably talking about...the quality of the cut from one of those things never seems very good to me...for small, quality work, I use a scroll saw - which is amazingly precise, controllable - albeit a bit slow. For craft jobs it's an awesome tool - you can guide the work with two hands - it's supported all the time. The reciprocating saw is just brutal. You obviously can't support both sides of the workpiece properly - and it's tough to get a good view of where the thing is cutting. Where possible, I clamp the good side to the workbench and hold the waste side with my spare hand. Sadly, that sometimes mean you have to work wrong-handed...and for small cuts you can't do it because you don't want to get your fingers in the way of the blade! It's OK for hacking out rough shapes from plywood or MDF - but I expect to have to do a lot of finishing afterwards. (Although for really fancy stuff, I usually use my home-built computer-controlled 3-axis milling machine...but it suffered a bit in our last house move - the framework got damp and warped - so I'm currently rebuilding it...bigger, faster, stronger and more precise!) SteveBaker (talk) 04:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree that it isn't a case of handedness. My guess would be that the down-stroke cuts cleaner than the up-stroke. One solution would be to clamp another (waste) piece of similar material on top of the nice one being cut, and then cut through both together. The shredded edges would then be on the second (waste) piece rather than on your nice piece. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:55, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually - I think the upstroke is the cleaner because on the way up, the teeth of the blade are pulling the material up against the underside of the tool - so there is no vibration. On the down-cut, the blade is pulling the material away from the plate on the underside of the tool and vibration is much more likely. That results in the saw alternately imposing no cutting force and a lot of cutting force onto the wood - versus a steady force if the material can't move. But the teeth on the blade are oriented so that it does most of the actual cutting on the upward stroke...which is supposed to help that. One of the reasons you get a better cut with a circular saw or a band saw is that those machines only move in one direction relative to the material.
In extreme cases, with very thin material, you might consider clamping the workpiece on top of some thicker 'sacrificial' plywood or MDF offcut and cutting through both layers at once. That takes a lot of the 'bounce' out of the situation because your workpiece is sandwiched between the bottom plate of the saw and the thicker sacrificial wood and therefore cannot vibrate at all...but as I said before, reciprocating saws are really not precision tools...they are a method of last resort when neither chop saw nor circular saw nor scroll saw can handle the work for one reason or another. SteveBaker (talk) 13:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 3

Locomotive (U.S. or Mexican)

?

Would someone please identify the locomotive seen on the pictures? It's for Wikimedia Commons purpose (file description). Thanks, --Scriberius (talk) 00:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look mommy!!It's a train!!!!! 117.194.224.126 (talk) 07:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Right, after much searching, I think I've found it. It's the Kansas City Southern de México (formerly TFM) 1407. See pictures here and here. Fribbler (talk) 12:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! It's now in the file descr. --Scriberius (talk) 16:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Market availabilty for teaching jobs?

Hi, I need help finding the market availabilty for a teaching job. I'm doing a paper, and I need help. Thanks, bye!--24.26.56.214 (talk) 01:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What sort of teaching job? Teaching a specific subject in your own country or a country that speaks your language or teaching ESL/EFL? There's always a demand for teachers, anyway. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 04:35, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

insulation resistance of heater

why a heater not burnt on low insulation resistance (400v, 50 kw, having 0.001Mohm insulation resistance) while a motor burnt at low insulation resistance.(according to IEEE standerd insulation resistance will be = operating voltage in kv + 1 answer will be in Mega ohm that will sufficient, but this only follow in case of motor not in case of heater. why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.56.7.44 (talk) 06:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I assume that by 0.001Mohm you mean 1000 Ohms. Calculate how much power will be dissipated in the insulation with 400 V aplied (0.4 amps x 400 V = 160 watts). Can the insulation handle this much heat? In a heater, the whole system will have been designed to produce heat and move it out of your machine. In water it has a high specific heat and convection can occur, so the heat can be moved away from your bad insulation. In the motor it may heat it up, particularly if there is one spot that has most of the conduction. I would expect that a 50kW motor has some sort of cooling system in it though. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pawn Shop in Pittsburgh Pennsylvania

Was there/is there, a pawn shop on the corner in Pittsburgh Pennsylvania and if so, why did it feature in the song of that name - and which corner was it/is it on? 92.8.99.255 (talk) 09:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that there is a pawn shop on a corner in Pittsburgh but without telling us which corner you're referring to, we can't give you a more precise answer. Also, what song are you referring to? Basically, if you could just break your original question up into a couple smaller sentences rather than one long run-on sentence, it may improve the chances of us being able to answer your questions. Dismas|(talk) 09:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He's talking about Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (song) by Guy Mitchell. I don't know the answer, btw. --Richardrj talk email 10:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. It would have helped if the OP had pointed that out instead of assuming everyone would know the song. Dismas|(talk) 10:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know it either, I just googled pawn shop corner Pittsburgh. --Richardrj talk email 10:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, now that we've got that established, according to a lyrics site, the first line is "There's a pawnshop on a corner in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania". So no specific corner is mentioned, although a subsequent line indicates that the singer is walking underneath a clock, which might help narrow it down, if indeed this was something one wanted to pursue. Me, I'll just assume that the songwriter made up the story, and chose a location that fit the rhythm and rhyme scheme of the song he was writing. --LarryMac | Talk 14:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The OQ contains the phrase "in the song of that name"; what more do you want? —Tamfang (talk) 07:23, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you use Pittsburgh.cityseach in conjunction with Google maps you find two pawn shops which seem to be located on corners (there may be more in suburban areas). As the lyrics mention a clock some OR on site would be required. For me, this takes about 15 hours via Heathrow and Kennedy Airport, so I give it a miss. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 15:38, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Even if there were a specific pawnshop in mind, and even if it were on a corner under a clock (though that detail more likely was added to enable the rhyme with "hock"), bear in mind that the song was written over half a century ago. The details will have changed. John M Baker (talk) 17:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't black boxes have parachutes, and exist in duplicate?

Why aren't the "black boxes" automatically ejected from a plummeting plane, to parachute safely down, and made to float upon the surface of water? Why don't such information recorders exist in duplicate, to be subjected each to a different fate -- say, one remaining within the aircraft wreckage, and its twin being ejected to seek its fate by a different means. This would seem to increase the likelihood of one of them surviving, and being recovered. Bus stop (talk) 14:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we like them to stay with the plane untill literally the very last split second. Even the data recovered then is useful to somebody. They can be recovered from just about anywhere anyway. Don't worry about getting the Air France ones. They were ven readable after long times at extreme depths in South African Airways Flight 295 (for the FDR to be unrecovered is highly exceptional) and more recently Adam Air Flight 574. That first one is about the only accident I know of where they were never recovered, and technology has moved on since then. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 14:08, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, from what I recall, there are more than one on each plane. Dismas|(talk) 14:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This news report indicates an unlikelihood of recovering flight data recorders in this particular tragedy. That is why I ask the above question. But I should add that I have little previous knowledge about this subject. Bus stop (talk) 14:22, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I've seen similar reports (although on BBC News, not Fox News, I would recommend you go there too, they are far more reliable). It seems that due to the high depth and large search area that it may be difficult to locate them. They do have features to aid in discovery, though, so I think there is still a good chance of finding them. --Tango (talk) 14:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think there are usually two, but they hold different data. One if the data recorder, which holds data about where the plane was flying, what the controls were set to, what malfunctions occurred, etc. The other is the cockpit voice recorder which records everything that is said in the cockpit so investigators can work out what the pilot and co-pilot were trying to do. I don't know why they are separate and why there aren't redundancies, it would seem to be to be sensible to have all the data in several boxes, but perhaps the added benefit (which is minimal - generally if you can find one box you should be able to find any others) isn't worth the extra costs involved. --Tango (talk) 14:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record, there is indeed a cockpit voice recorder and a flight data recorder and nothing else. I did once recently here of a combined one, though, where both compnents were rolled into one. Key systems are supposed to be triple-redundant, but legislation deals seperatly with the black boxes and simply says a CVR and an FDR must be present. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 15:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See Flight data recorder#Future devices which mentions self-ejecting devices, multiple installations and emergency locator transmitters. Nanonic (talk) 14:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Ejecting a data recorder would require you to know when to do it. The pilot and co-pilot will be far too busy trying, until the last possible moment, to save their aircraft, so it would have to be automated. I'm not sure how that could be done without significant risk of ejecting it too soon for it to have all the information required. --Tango (talk) 14:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Navy submarines and surface ships have this amazing sonar technology to detect distant enemy vessels. The "black boxes" have acoustic signals which send out recurring signals intended to be easily located. Why in hell would it be doubtful that hydrophones towed in a search grid over the debris zone would not "hear" the honking of the black box, or "see" the underwater debris field from a giant airplane? How far from the box is its audio signal supposed to be detectable by hydrophones? [7] says an "underwater locator beacon," which clearly has the same intended function as the beacon on the flight data recorder, is detectable at one statute mile, sending out a 37.5 khz signal. Edison (talk) 15:32, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know the range of the "pinger" on the boxes, but the search area is vast and rather deep. They really don't know where the plane went down with any accuracy. After edit conflict: The water they are searching in is more than a statue mile deep, so that probably rules out surface ships finding it. A ship with mini-submarines is on its way, so that might stand a chance, but it has a wide area to search. --Tango (talk) 15:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Forget minisubmarines. Surface ships are way faster and should be able to lower tuned hydrophones close to the bottom and run a search grid. Various sources quote a range of 1 to 1.5 miles. The sighted flames and wreckage on the surface provide a good idea of where to look, unless it blew into fragments at high altitude. The plane itself should have automatically triggered beacons beside the FDR beacon, like many small planes and helicopters do. They knew the ocean was deep when they bought the beacons. The chorus of lowering of expectations sounds really lame, considering the need to find out why a plane with all those redundant systems crashed. Edison (talk) 15:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, if that seems to be failing they can feed information about the weights, sizes, locations etc of various pieces and use computer wizardry to narrow the search down a great deal. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 15:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do they have hydrophones with cables about 5 miles long? (Which is what would be required, considering it would be dragged a long way behind the ship). That's a very long cable! --Tango (talk) 16:58, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I had a chuckle when I read a CNN article yesterday that said they found a few pieces of debris from that crash, including an oil drum. I don't really see a plane flying around with an oil drum on board. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 16:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cable-laying ships routinely carry thousands of miles of cable. --Sean 19:55, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course they do, but that's not really the same thing as dragging a piece of equipment several miles behind you. --Tango (talk) 20:55, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The SURTASS boats drag a piece of equipment several miles behind them, but the hydrophones can only operate at a max depth of 1500'.—eric 00:23, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(undent): This article puts the depth at about 7km (or 4.3 mi, which makes it an unusually deep area according to the Atlantic Ocean article) and the area as "very mountainous". The French official quoted says he was "not optimistic" about finding them because of this, the crappy weather and a limit of 30 days before the locator beacon runs out of power. I guess time will tell if they're lowering expectations with good reason or not. TastyCakes (talk) 16:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

News stories have said "2 to 4 miles." There's no reason, other than Murphy's Law, to assume that the FDR would perversely find the one deepest spot in the ocean. If it were 2 miles down or 4 miles down, with a 1 mile range, my math questions the need for a 5 mile cable, unless you feel the need to dig a 1 mile deep trough for some reason. In the 1860's they were able to lay a heavy cable on the ocean bottom across the Atlantic. In the 21st century they should be able to tow a hydrophone at a depth of 3 miles. Again, they know that planes will crash in the ocean on occasion Why would they be allowed to use black boxes with an inadequate range for the beacon? Subs are tracked at far greater distances, without intentional transmission of beacon signals. Edison (talk) 23:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The cable isn't going to hang straight down. The boat it is attached to will be moving so the cable will be dragged behind. Since they have a lot of area to cover I expect the boat would be moving pretty quickly, so the cable will be at a pretty shallow angle going down, hence the need for greater length in order to get the necessary depth. --Tango (talk) 01:43, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

splinter cell chaos theory >>moved to entertainment

in the displace int. level, i hafta upload tracers in the three servers. but, i need to hack the first server in the operations room to do that. and unfortunately, i seem to get only three chances not the usual minimum of four. is this a bug? should i reload the mission, or just let it be and dont care for the mission rating???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.50.136.57 (talk) 15:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing that you must be asking about some sort of game. But since you can't be bothered to give us any hints what you're on about, I can't be bothered to go looking for an answer. --ColinFine (talk) 23:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved your question to the entertainment desk. You'll have better luck finding gamers there. 71.236.26.74 (talk) 00:14, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does Wikipedia have..

Does wikipedia have a like, open discussion chat box, kinda like Mibbit.com but only on here..?

I could have sworn I saw one..

If so, where can I find it? Gothrokkprincess (talk) 15:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not to my knowledge. There are Wikipedia IRC channels, however. TastyCakes (talk) 16:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You can use the Wikipedia IRC channels from Mibbit —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.54.169 (talk) 19:04, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

US jury duty

Why is it that the pay to the jurors in the US court system, usually people who have been involuntarily pressed into service, are paid in almost every case far below the minimum wage? 65.121.141.34 (talk) 15:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You get paid to be on a jury? I thought it was an unpaid civic duty. Or do you mean the amount you get to go and eat and such? TastyCakes (talk) 16:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Pay varies by state. I think the most any state pays is $50 a day, while the state I am in pays $10 a day. I can't even drive to the courthouse and park for that amount. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 16:31, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, bummer. TastyCakes (talk) 16:32, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In MA you don't get paid anything for the first three days. I forget how much you get paid for any remaining days.
The answer to the original question is that jury duty is considered a civic duty. Like paying taxes. APL (talk) 17:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You also don't really want to make it lucrative. You don't want people showing up for jury duty excited about earning something. (It could also add incentives to dragging things out, I imagine.) But it $10 a day is ridiculously low—might as well not pay anything if you're going to pay that. They should at least compensate for the cost of travel to the courthouse. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 17:22, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
California is $15 per day and 34 cents per mile from the courthouse to your residence. Both payments start only on the second day of service. The courts I've served in also had their own parking structures with free parking provided to jurors. Dragons flight (talk) 18:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did jury duty three years ago and got a check for $40, if I remember. I never got called for a jury and wasted an entire day. --Blue387 (talk) 19:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is basically a form of involuntary servitude, equivalent to compelling someone to clean city hall for 1/4 of minimum wage. Some employers pay their employees while they're on jury duty, but most minimum wage employees just have to suck it up and do without 3/4 of their income, and hope they are not replaced in their fulltime jobs. Minimum wage or better for jurors or jury pool standbys only makes sense. Edison (talk) 23:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When I did mine in the UK (many years ago) I was paid at my regular job rate but they paid my tax/NI contributions so I ended up ahead by 25% or so on my salary. They also paid a daily food allowance. At the time I didn't drive but I believe their were petrol/parking payments too. Exxolon (talk) 23:45, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many companies pay their employees as if they were at work while serving jury duty. --Nricardo (talk) 23:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A relative of mine recently served on a jury. She got paid by her company, as if she were at work, for the first five days. After that, the state paid her $50 a day. Again, far far less than what she actually makes at her job. Dismas|(talk) 01:13, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to bring in another country for perspective, here in Ontario, Canada, people called to jury duty are paid nothing for the first 2 weeks, then $40/day (Canadian dollars) for the next 8 weeks, then $100/day if they have to continue beyond that (i.e. due to a very long trial). For comparison, the general minimum wage in Ontario is $9.50/hour. Jurors' travel expenses are covered only if they live more than 40 km (25 miles) from the courthouse and they actually serve on a jury rather than just being in the pool. Employers are not required to continue paying the person while they are on jury duty, but some do; I have no idea how many. --Anonymous, 04:25 UTC, June 4, 2009.

top mba colleges in delhi

can anybody tell me about top 50 mba colleges in new delhi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashant101 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know New Delhi is large, but are there really 50 coleges there?! It there are, wow. (Of course, Cleveland has half a doze if you count community colleges, so maybe...)
As for an answer, a Goodle search got me this - a blog, so take it for what it's worth. http://mbacollegesinindia.blogspot.com/ There is also this: http://www.indiandost.com/delhicollege.php (Sorry, I tried in the sandbox to figure out how to turn these into links some time ago and couldn't; I'll giveit a hirl again when I have more time.)Somebody or his brother (talk) 20:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non-proft org

What happens if a non-profit goes bankrupt? What I mean is, say it had payment obligations outstanding and someone was able to smuggle most of the money out of their accounts. Is the chairman of the board of directors personally liable, or is this question more complicated? 65.121.141.34 (talk) 19:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If someone is smuggling money then that's fraud and there would be a criminal prosecution. In a more common situation of a non-profit simply going bankrupt (due to spending more than it makes for too long), the answer is "it depends". In the UK (other countries are probably similar) there are two main types of non-profit (there are sub-types within them, but that's not important). Incorporated non-profits and unincorporated non-profits. An incorporated non-profit is just like any other limited liability company - the board of trustees are not personally liable for anything (barring exceptional circumstances). Unincorporated non-profits have no legal personality of their own and are really just the trustees personally doing stuff (but as a group), so if the non-profit goes bankrupt the trustees are liable for any outstanding debts (since actually it is them that have the debts, the non-profit being little more than a name). --Tango (talk) 21:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photographing police cars is illegal in France?

My father told me years ago, when he visited France, that it is illegal to photograph police cars in France. I've never heard of photographing police cars being illegal anywhere else, at least within Europe. Is there any truth to this? JIP | Talk 20:32, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about France, but in the UK there are laws against photographing police officers. I think it says "in a way that could aid terrorists" or something, but it is worded so vaguely that it basically bans photographing them at all (it's not actually enforced, it's just there for when the authorities feel they need it). --Tango (talk) 21:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Re the UK, see [8] and Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 Nil Einne (talk) 22:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neither Legality of recording by civilians nor Photography and the law say anything about France unfortunately Nil Einne (talk) 22:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do the cars carry a nocturnal image of the Eiffel Tower? —Tamfang (talk) 02:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 4

Vacation in China and Internet censorship

I will be vacationing in China over the summer for several weeks. I hold a Canadian citizenship. Generally speaking, is it considered dangerous to be accessing sites such as Youtube, Facebook, Wikipedia through a proxy in order to access the Firewall-restricted contents? I'd imagine I would be mainly accessing the Internet through hotel room connections. Are there incidents of tourists being detained by the police for accessing blocked sites? Acceptable (talk) 00:06, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, I would not mess with the Chinese government. You will probably be OK, but they do not have a great record with regards to these things. Leave Wikipedia alone for 2 weeks, enjoy China, but I would stay away from antagonizing your hosts unneccessarily. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While in China, I didn't use a proxy, but other long-term expatriates did. It's kind of slow, but it works. They never recieved any backlashes from it. I only have this anecdotal evidence to go on. While I was there, in late 2007, I could get facebook and google, but not WP or youtube. The Chinese youtube analogue is [Tudou http://www.tudou.com]. OT: The cheapest internet you find is in cheap hotels, where you have access to an unprotected network if you have a laptop. Otherwise, internet cafes are generally about a tenth of the price of the access in hotels. You'll need your passport for an internet cafe - they'll scan it, but don't let them keep it. Steewi (talk) 02:17, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Martial arts belt color class

What is the orders of belts used for martial arts belt levels. I know it start out white, then next level is yellow, then orange. What color will be after orange. Is that where the medium class begins? Would it be greenbelt, then bluebelt, then purple belt, then brown belt. Is brown belt a high class in martial class or is it medium class. Is there such thing as army belt. I know blackbelt is master level in martial arts, there is 10 degree levels of blackbelt.--69.229.240.187 (talk) 00:37, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the Black belt (martial arts) article: Rank and belts are not equivalent between arts, styles, or even within some organisations. So, really, trying to come up with an all encompassing scheme for all the arts is meaningless. Dismas|(talk) 01:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, usually the belt colours go as follow: white, pale yellow, yellow, peach, amber, orange, grass green, bright green, cyan, teal, turquoise, blue, sky blue, lilac, purple, violet, crimson, red, salmon, pink, hot pink, beige, brown, sienna, black. So you'll have a lot of training to do before you reach master level. =) 194.100.223.164 (talk) 10:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

most trivial discussions

I remember reading an article once about the most frivolous, pedantic or trivial discussions on wikipedia but now I can't remember how to find it. Does anyone know the name of the page or what to search for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Payneham (talk • contribs) 01:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LAME may be a good place to start. Its not directly related, but if you want this subject matter, it should pique your interest some. Wikipedia:Historic debates is another good one. When I read the topic, I thought maybe you were interested in the film My Dinner with Andre which may be 2 hours of the most trivial discussion ever; alas it predates Wikipedia by some 20 years. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not solely containing trivial discussions, but I must point out the old, very funny page Bad Jokes And Other Deleted Nonsense has now apparently been deleted (well, not redlink-deleted, but ... you'll see), and is available instead at [9]. It's got plenty of frivolous discussions on it. Tempshill (talk) 02:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A few years ago, there was a famously protracted discussion over the use of one image in the cat article. I can't find it now.--Shantavira|feed me 06:34, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Talk page highlights is pretty great, particularly the discussion on mammary intercourse.Rockpocket 06:47, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which Robin Cook book is this?

I recall having read a medical thriller by Robin Cook. The plot went something like normal people were being diagnosed with cancer, and hence declared brain dead. However, the protagonist found out that it was not actually cancer, just a mutation of common cold which was registering as cancer. This was deliberately being done by one of the doctors of the hospital. I clearly remember one situation where the protagonist is barred from entering the hospital, hence he breaks in, and 'steals' the heart or brain of the affected patient (who is dead by that time). Please help me in finding the name of this novel - I think it might Fever, Blindsight, Fatal Cure, or Vital Signs, but not necessarily only those.

Thanks a lot! --RohanDhruva (talk) 05:59, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The bibliography in our article Robin Cook (American novelist) might help you. It links to articles about his novels, most of which contain a plot synopsis. Gandalf61 (talk) 11:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous&oldid=294363765"