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.
Given California's current severe state budgetary problems, it seems likely that Caltrans has had to cancel or postpone many projects. Carrying out postponed projects may depend on the state's revenues recovering. Caltrans does not seem to publicize their rationale for prioritizing different projects. This response applies equally to your two questions from yesterday. Marco polo (talk) 01:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Similar attracts?
I'm a dentist and I married a dentist and I find that ≥50% of what we talk about relates to dentistry. I then come to wonder what I would have done had I not married someone in the same field as I am! We jump right into discussions, rather than having to explain to each other minor details that would have to be explained had one of us been an accountant or a bus driver. Is anyone else in a similar situation out there and do you also find that you speak about your field in such great magnitude? DRosenbach(Talk | Contribs)03:53, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if two people work in the same field, obviously they'll have a shared basis for conversation. Why wouldn't they? I mean, I have friends who work in the same field as I do, and a lot of our conversation is about that field. Then again, I have friends who work in a completely different field, but we share hobbies. Guess what a lot of our conversation is about? I'm not really sure what you're trying to find out here; it seems kind of obvious to me that the easiest and most natural points of conversation between people spring from shared experiences or circumstances. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 06:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My father was a physicist and engineer, and my mother majored in French with a minor in Classics (both attended the University of London: Imperial College and Westfield College, respectively, although they met after University.) When doing an English cryptic crossword together, they found that she solved the scientific and technical clues and he solved the ones involving language and literature. —— Shakescene (talk) 08:47, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well...maybe what do people talk about when they don't share the same field -- yes, that can be my question! If ≥50% of my conversations with my wife are about our shared field, what do non-shared field couples discuss in that time share that we use for ≥50% of our conversation? Or, does their ≤50% "other" chatter become their 100%? DRosenbach(Talk | Contribs)18:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ex-cardiologist here with a partner in HR. We talk about anything and everything (in no particular order): culture, food, travel, religion, politics, languages, decoration, gardening, news, history, entertainment, friends, family, plans for the future... The list is simply endless. Like Shakescene, when we play Trivial Pursuits I answer the Science & Nature and Geography questions, whilst my partner excels at Sport. -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 19:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When I was married to a telephone operator (I'm a teacher and translator), I found that 90% of our conversation was about my field, and the other 10% about hers. In fact, it was more of a monologue than a dialogue. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 13:13, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are all humans hopeless self-promoters?
Is self-promotion simply a part of human life? The only difference being that some do it more discreetly and others make more noise? --Quest09 (talk) 10:45, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An actor is with his date. He monopolises the conversation by speaking for hours about his acting achievements. Finally he says "But that's enough about me. Let's talk about you. Tell me, what did you think about my latest performance?Cuddlyable3 (talk) 14:24, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To be serious for a moment, humans have a tendency to self-promotion, but many manage to overcome it. There are in fact plenty of people who work for good, quietly, behind the scenes, and don't draw attention to themselves. The trouble is that you don't hear about them nearly as much as the self-promoters. In fact you probably have to go and actively search them out. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would disagree with some of the above, specifically that all humans have one certain predisposition (even with exceptions). I think the duality of Extraversion and introversion where people are one of two types (or a mix) is more closely reflective of this topic. Vespine (talk) 04:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Acari 6.0 Megashot camera
Can anyone tell me anything about this camera please? It is being offered by a seed company if you spend a total of £20. The advertising material says it is "interpolable to 1.3 megapixels" which might or might not be a printing error. The deal is that you get given one of four camera models, that they choose. The other three camera models are known brands with seven or ten megapixels, well worth £20. I cannot find anything when searching on Google for this, except brief mentions in east-european languages which translate badly. 78.146.232.198 (talk) 11:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, "interpolable" means "able to be interpolated", which basically means that this piece of crap that they'll surely foist on you maybe has VGA resolution at best, I'd run far far far away from this offer. --LarryMac | Talk12:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. This is a bad offer. From a Google search, The Acari 6.0 appears to be one of those "3 in 1" cameras that are also web-cams. "Interpolable to 1.3 megapixels" means nothing useful. It just means "It gets less than this, but we can stretch it in software", and 1.3megapixels is nothing to write home about anyway.
Worse is the very shady "You might get one of these fabulous prizes! Gold! Silver! Platinum! Dirt!" marketing. You never, ever get the good stuff in these deals.
Conclusion : I have seen cameras as good as this in the drugstore for about $20. If you need a cheap camera, get one of those and avoid these con artists. APL (talk) 13:41, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, it reflects badly on the seeds, that they need to be promoted with some irrelevant geegaw as an addon. Products that emphasise quality don't rely on such promotions (you won't see "Buy a Mercedes and get this fondue set" or "Buy this Cartier watch and receive these leatherette driving gloves"). The volume and intensity of promotions generally indicates products that can't differentiate themselves from their competitors on the products' own attributes (it's cheaper, it's faster, it's better) but have to try to distract you with the colouring in book and travel jigsaw it comes with. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk19:04, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If they get to choose, why would they give you the good, expensive ones? Why wouldn't they just give you the cheap one? Come on, use some common sense! They are preying on your desire for something-for-nothing and will happily take advantage of you for it. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 17:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with all the above. The clincher is the "300 KPX" written near the lens - very low definition. Unfortunately some people are going to be taken in by the "6.0" and think it refers to 6 megapixels. I agree this is harmful marketing for the company concerned. 78.146.187.7 (talk) 19:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Green hat graffiti
While at a conference in Spain, we saw some graffiti of a face wearing a green hat all over the place: [1]. Some friends brought back photos of the same symbol seen in Berlin. Is there any particular meaning to this symbol? Marnanel (talk) 11:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The hat is of a similar style to the one often pictured on the head of Che Guevara, however Che's hat is black and not green. Seeing as his image is a popular one, it could perhaps be something related to him, or to perhaps another revolutionary. --Jayron3220:56, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is there an example in popular culture of a type couple in which the woman was an quintessential B Type personality and the man was a very passionate, A Type personality? --Reticuli88 (talk) 13:04, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This sounds like it might be a homework question. We don't do people's homework for them. If there is a specific part of the assignment you are stuck on, we will try and help, but the questions you have asked are far too broad. If I am mistaken and this isn't a homework assignment then please explain the reason for your question - it will help us work out how to answer it (we need more context). --Tango (talk) 13:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is all going to depend on what you intend the buckets to hold. Animal feed? Paint? Radioactive waste? They are all going to have different target markets, prices and advertisement strategies. Googlemeister (talk) 15:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That article is about as perfect as an article could be, aside from the fact that it's the last line of the article before they get around to mentioning that its purpose is to carry water. They describe what it is physically, and without the last part, but with all the photos, you might be inclined to think that it's merely a decoration of some kind. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots16:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is, of course, endless trivia that could be added, to pad it out. There is the song, "The Old Oaken Bucket". There is the movie, The Bucket List, which refers to the old euphemism for dying, "To kick the bucket". Would that kind of stuff improve the article? Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots16:03, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since the OP has not come back to defend him or herself, I'm presuming it's homework. Which means, as I'm bored at the moment, time for some fun in helping the OP :-)
1. You can market buckets by standing on the street corner shoulting, "HEY, I GOT BUCKETS!" at the top of your lungs. When people start to stare at you, explain all that they can do with buckets. Including...uh, putting stuff in them. All kinds of stuff.
Your target marekt will be anyone who can use the bucket for some purpose other than just putting...well...stuff int hem. For isntance, people near death may use them for kicking.
Lure them in with stuff they really need even more. Like, "Do you need a nice, shiny, new 2010 car for only $500? Well, too bad, we don't have any! but, we got buckets, and that's the next best thing." Also, the old familiar 2 for 1 deal. "Buy one bucket at twice the price, and get the second one free!" (Admission, these are both borrowed; the first made up by a nephew when he was just 6-7.)
Shape, size, etc. - Buckets should have all kidns of flashy colors, and should have other peoples' ads on them - that will make them want your buckets. Hint: Do not put your competitor's ads on your buckets, it will just look weird. As for shape, of course, they must be bucket shaped, becuase if they were apple shaped, someone might think they were apples and eat them.
Pricing - I can't think of anything for this one. Just pick a random number. Or, have two friends each suggest prices,a nd do rock, paper, scissors. Yeah, that'll work. It'll give you something to do in detention after turning these answers in on Monday. :-)Somebody or his brother (talk) 16:25, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A bucket shaped like an Apple Computer apple, though, could be good. Any data you want to throw away could literally go into the bit bucket. The bucket can hold those rocks, papers and scissors also. Side note: You have a nephew that's 6-7? He should be in the NBA, don'cha know. Scoring lots of buckets. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots20:01, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I meant he was 6-7 years old when he invented that funny ad idea. But, given his size and the way he eats now that he's about 12 or 13, he might be 6 foot 7 one day; his dad is. And that's without standing on a bucket.Somebody or his brother (talk) 02:40, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't they cottoned on by now that it looks utterly ridiculous, especially just lathering it on thickly around the lips and that's it? Thanks, anyway. AlmostCrimes (talk) 16:24, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What a weird thing. Surely they have been informed that there are lip balms that can protect you without making you look like a clown. I suspect it is part of the "culture" as much as anything else at this point. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 19:24, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you're just looking at the cosmetics, perhaps given a choice of protective films, they want something visible to match the macho look of the black glare-absorbing paint under the eyes of (non-Black) Australasian rugby players. —— Shakescene (talk) 20:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
American baseball and football players (white and black) wear that too, usually just a big stripe under the eyes. Sometimes they are actually adhesive strips, and sometimes they have advertisements on them. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:05, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This suggests [5] it is partly a cultural thing. It's worth remembering BTW that's we're talking about something which ideally should last 7 hours+ including most of the peak UV time and in high UV locations like NZ Nil Einne (talk) 22:06, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing protects from the sun like zinc cream. As a result of combination in climate and culture, aussies don't think zinc cream on the lips looks ridiculous at all. Get sun burn on your lips a few times and you'll probably change your mind about how ridiculous it looks too ;) .Vespine (talk) 04:38, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Driving a car that has not been driven for a while - Follow up from OP posted 17 August.
So the OP asked for advice about why his car wouldn't move after being stationary for 6 weeks and we all jumped into offering him our advice, conclusions, suggestions etc., etc. But as with most other questions posted here, we never get to find out what happened. I accept it's not a chatroom, but come on people, an outcome response would be nice from time to time.92.23.172.249 (talk) 18:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get it - maybe he's driving the car, maybe it blew up and he died? If they didn't say anything in the original question (eg thanks, problem fixed) what's the chances now. Also it's a service. forget the tip ! I've had to get used to the not knowing feeling over the years.
My apologies, I haven't been active for a while. So I brought it to a garage, they told me that my brake drums have rusted out and needed to be un-seized or something. In total, about $ 500 was spent on fixing the car. Next time, I'll remember to keep it in the garage. Acceptable (talk) 03:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you include variants, then the AK hands down. The AK is the most common firearm in the world. The runner up is the AR, at one tenth of the AK's population. Mainly because it's made out of stamped steel. You can make one on a milling machine, in your garage, out of a few steel blocks (With the exception of the barrel). —Preceding unsigned comment added by HitmanNumber86 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know nothing about guns, so I'm not saying you're wrong - but being the most common doesn't directly mean it's the got the highest production per year. Vimescarrot (talk) 18:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I second the AK, specifically the AK-47. It is by far the most common firearm in the world. The above post may be true in some cases, but not in this one. From the article "the weapon and its numerous variants remain the most widely used assault rifles in the world — so much so that more AK-type rifles have been produced than all other assault rifles combined" . Vespine (talk) 04:34, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That a fasces, an ancient symbol used by the Romans and by many others, in a wide variety of context since. Like the swastika, its use predates (and is generally unrelated to) its use by 20th Century nutters. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk18:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The fasces (with a single axe rather than the double-axe of the Italian fascists) is (or was) one of the official symbols of the United States Senate (looking back to its classical inspiration), and can be seen on the Senate's walls. It was also on the back of the silver Mercury dime (10-cent U.S. coin) of the early twentieth century, about which the article's editors write
The reverse design, a fasces juxtaposed with an olive branch, was intended to symbolize America's readiness for war, combined with its desire for peace. Although the fasces symbol was later adopted by Benito Mussolini and his National Fascist Party, the symbol has remained quite common in American iconography and has generally avoided any stigma associated with its usage in wartime Italy.
My sister's cats are usually pretty brave - living in a house with three large dogs they are used to intimidating situations. Yet, they seem absolutely petrified of her husband's landing net which he uses when fishing. I am quite puzzled why this would be, the net is black and quite probably smells of fish. I would have thought the cats would have shown some interest, but they are very scared, even when the net is just lying in a heap on the floor, avoiding it by at least 4 feet. So, any ideas why the cats would be such scaredy cats? Astronaut (talk) 18:42, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The cats may have had a previous bad experience with the net, and now avoid it like the plague. I expect that being accidentally tangled in a fishing net must not bring joy to a cat. Oh, and we have a proverb in French: "Chat échaudé craint l'eau froide", meaning: "a cat that's been scalded once becomes scared of cold water". --Xuxl (talk) 20:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A similar remark is attributed to Mark Twain: a cat that jumps onto a hot stove will not jump onto one again, but it also won't jump onto a cold stove.
My favorite cat once jumped onto the kitchen counter and from there to the top of the fridge, and then climbed inside our kitchen's dropped ceiling and walked to the other end of the room. At this point the plastic tile he was standing on fell out of the grid. He landed safely on the floor, but he never did that again. --Anonymous, 20:56 UTC, August 21, 2009.
There's no telling what an animal will be scared of. I have a couple dogs that are scared of completely random objects. For one it's blue balls, like racquet balls. We've found a few other items that this particular dog is scared of that I can't think of right now. All we need to do is show the items to him, in a non-threatening way, and he cowers. The other dog is a Great Pyrenees, so he's big and tough and will stand up to anyone but we've run across a couple things about which he's been equally leery. Dismas|(talk)05:31, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My last dog couldn't cope with ironing boards. even folded away in a closet he would go crazy and run away from it if the door was open... To the best of my knowledge though i'm not aware of any previous run-ins with ironing boards that will have caused this... 'Twas just his thing i suppose... Gazhiley (talk) 11:18, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Beeping
Is there a reason that something that beeps about once a second is so damn annoying?
Thanks. 18:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.32.17 (talk)
Beeping once a minute, or an hour, or every 1/10 of a second is also very annoying.
Is this related to the Chinese water torture? Perhaps the coincidence of the frequency with your pulse or heartbeat adds to the frustration. Staying in a crowded emergency room where there's not nearly enough staff to attend to every single beep can drive you crazy until (like the staff) you get used to them and ignore them. —— Shakescene (talk) 21:15, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the continual time-keeping of the beep or chime subconsciously forces us to keep time with it, thereby forcing us to perform an additional task. Who likes more tasks? DRosenbach(Talk | Contribs)21:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting question. The person who lives downstairs from me has set up a bamboo wind-chime in the garden, right under my bedroom window. Presumably he finds occasional exposure to it when he goes into the garden to be a relaxing experience, its clattering wild and free and natural and untrammeled by everyday formality, but I find continual exposure to it intensely irritating. I don't know why. I enjoy the sound of the wind rushing through the trees, or the pattering of rain, but try though I might to interpret it in the same way, I hate the wind-chime, and that's an inconsistent position. Some strange psychological thing going on there. I know somebody who is irritated by the slightest slurping or gulping sound another person makes while eating; once in a while I get that way myself. I think the source and meaning of a sound are what make it potentially annoying. Some of my favourite music, for instance, consists of regular beeping noises, and doesn't irritate me at all, but might well do if somebody else was playing it at the limits of hearing. It's to do with indignation, a feeling that the sound is unnecessary, and the moral aspect of having it occupy some of your attention due to somebody else's thoughtlessness, or perhaps your own mistake, or some similar reason to have negative thoughts and burgeoning anger. 213.122.61.48 (talk) 23:10, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We live in (windy) Scotland and had a neighbour who thought it would be nice to have a set of wind-chimes on their fence at the back of their house and guess what? They chimed all night and kept us awake. So we politely asked them to take them down at night and guess what?? They moved them to the nearest corner of their house to ours - and guess what?? After suffering the annoyance for several days and nights we went and bought a set of those enormous ones that sound like church bells on a Sunday morning and hung them on the nearest corner of our house to theirs - and guess what?? Ours never bothered us one bit even though they sounded like Big Ben on Coronation Day - but guess what?? Theirs were skinny and tinny but they really annoyed us but we daren't show our annoyance as we had by then discovered our neighbours were on a power trip. So guess what?? We, and the other neighbours in our street who had also been annoyed by their skinny tinny chimes, mutually decided to freeze them out - and guess what?? After a couple of months of trying to re-integrate themselves into the community, but without taking down their chimes - they gave up and moved out - and guess what?? We took ours down and threw them in the trash. Persistence and patience always pays off in the end. But the funny thing is -and we will never understand the human psychology behind this - our other neighbours never complained about our Big Ben Chimes - but they continued to the end to complain about the skinny tinny chimes. Indeed they thanked us for our efforts at trying to get the skinny tinny chimes taken down. Isn't that strange?92.23.172.249 (talk) 23:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Pffft. Bizarre!! What if there was a kind of actual weather effect, which we expected and were familiar with as something which happens all the time naturally and can't be helped, which sounded like wind chimes, or indeed like a regular beeping at 1-second intervals? Would it be annoying? I think it would probably be easy to perceive as soothing, if that was the background reason for the noise. How about crickets chirping? 213.122.61.48 (talk) 23:35, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One second may be that time where you're just getting over the momentary alertness/distraction caused by the previous beep when the next beep happens. You're kept in perpetual annoyance by the beeps. If they were once every five minutes, you'd have the 4+ minutes in between to de-stress. Shorter intervals wouldn't be as annoying as you may habituate to it as a constant drone. - But note that even more annoying than a constant relatively short interval beep is an intermittent beep that you can't locate the source of [6]. -- 128.104.112.102 (talk) 00:20, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just heard something beeping this morning when I was trying to sleep. I don't even know what it was and it wasn't coming from my apartment, so I figured I'd go see why these things have the reaction they do, and I found nothing and so I asked here. Anyway, the repeated distraction of attention thing seems right. Thanks also for the windchime story. It was hilarious. 08:11, 22 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.32.17 (talk)
August 22
Keystrokes in a debate
This question is clearly soapboxing and crossing the line between the talk: side and public side of the RD. I have therefore removed it. Please debate this removal (if you must) on the discussion page. SteveBaker (talk) 03:17, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, once the shell has left the barrel, it doesn't really matter WHAT the gun does. The impressive thing about this system is that you can fire such a shell at ALL. Without their recoil-damping-thingamajigger, such a gun would likely take your arm off. Imagine such a shoulder-mounted howitzer without their high-tech recoil-control system. Its impressive how LITTLE recoil that gun has. --Jayron3203:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It does chuck it only 700yards (plus I have to stand up to fire it) - what was wrong with lying face down in a ditch with a mortar- I know body armor is getting better every day - but do I really want to stand up in the middle of a field..83.100.250.79 (talk) 12:41, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
With any weapon, you have to think of it as a tradeoff between a lot of factors. This one seems to be very unwieldy to fire—certainly more unwieldy than the many other options the military has for delivering that much explosive power. If I were in the field, I would not want to be standing for two minutes exposed, all of my weight on my front foot, trying desperately not to fall over. The goal is NOT "maximum firepower"—the goal is, what weapon is ideal for a given tactical situation. That particular weapon looks hard to aim and real, real pain to use. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 14:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really sure there's a tactical need for a handheld 76mm mortar. Between the rifle-mounted M203 grenade launcher and the heavier bipod and ground-mounted mortars, I don't really see any reason to need this. 98's and 83's objections are well-written - exposing the soldier, and putting him off balance, do not seem like a good idea in a combat situation - no matter how large an explosive he manages to lob. Nimur (talk) 03:53, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
First off, when you fire an AT4 in the prone position you risk knocking off the fins of the rocket. Second, an AT4 has a HUGE backblast area. Third, AT4s suck at making it to a target over a hundred meters away. Fourth, 1 AT4 = 1 new BMW. Fifth, the Javelin has no backblast area but goes straight up, and still can't be fired indoors. Sixth, an AT4 isn't going to take out a tank in one hit, especially a modern tank.
So I can either, stand up/kneel, aim, and take out the tank form inside a building, or run outside, kneel, fire a shot, maybe hit the target, and hope the second guy who ran out with me, with another AT4, doesn't get hit so that we might make a catastrophic kill (as opposed to a firepower or mobility kill), and don't forget that everything behind me, up to a hundred meters, would be dead. --HitmanNumber86 (talk) 05:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The "God Hates ____ " Church isn't exactly known for being particularly rational in their beliefs, never mind the rest of it. They aren't particularly as interested in such concepts as "facts" and "reality" as much as they are in getting publicity for their sick, demented viewpoints. --Jayron3203:21, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The group protested, according to the following quote reproduced several times on various internet stories, because of "Rogers' failure to condemn homosexuality." // BL \\ (talk) 03:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a quote from a typical news story about the incident :
“Shirley Phelps-Roper, the attorney for the Westboro Baptist Church, explained that Rogers, as a Presbyterian minister with a television program, had a responsibility to comment on the issue. By not doing so, she explained that he was helping to perpetuate homosexuality, which the group says falls into the category of "whoremongery and adultery, which will damn the soul forever in hell." She added that the support some Americans have given to homosexuals has been the reason behind horrible tragedies including the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the crash of the NASA shuttle Colombia, and the nightclub fire in Rhode Island.”[7]
The space-shuttle problem was obviously caused by NASA's naming it for a drug-producing South American nation instead of giving it a righteous U.S. name. Deor (talk) 13:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did Phelps really call that shuttle "Colombia"? Oy! "Columbia", of course, is a nickname for the U.S.A. The U.S.A. does produce marijuana, but much of the other illegal drug production is outsourced - to places like Colombia. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots18:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Most anglophone people pronounce the name of the country Colombia exactly the same as Columbia. The Colombians themselves don't, though. That's ok, I'll keep Mom/Mum about it. :) -- JackofOz (talk) 23:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's its "formal" pronunciation. I always heard it as a homophone to Karo, the corn syrup - like care-oh. And don't forget New Berlin (pronounced new BER-lin) and San Jose (san joe's). Then there's the toddlin' town Chicago, which is called shi-caw-go, shi-cah-go, and sometimes shi-car-go. Oh, and Illinois, which is often called ill-i-NOISE. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots10:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So I'm going on a flight in 9 days. It's possible I won't have my driver's license by that point. What, if anything could I bring in order to get through security, definitely? Chris M. (talk) 05:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am fairly certain you need some sort of picture ID. Contact the airport directly, though, to get specific ways to fix this problem. --Jayron3205:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know someone who lost their ID when they went to Vegas. She had to get a police report and some other things, but they did let her on the flight home. I agree with Jayron32. Contact the airport or if you're in the US, TSA directly and see if there's anything you can do. 08:15, 22 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.32.17 (talk)
Where are you, and where are you going to? The answers vary hugely depending on that. If you're on an internal flight within a passport area (e.g. Schengen, United States), then any government issued photo ID will generally suffice. If you're crossing a border/recalcitrant part (e.g. Australia to Malaysia, or mainland Europe to UK), you'll need a passport. But a passport is just a good idea generally, since it will always work --Saalstin (talk) 10:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does "recalcitrant" have a special meaning in relation to air space, international borders etc, Saalstin? Normally it means stubborn, defiant, resistant to authority, obstinate, passively rebellious. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:58, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just asked because Saalstin mentioned the Australia-Malaysia route immediately after the word "recalcitrant", which reminded me of the brouhaha caused when the Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating described the Malaysian PM Mahathir bin Mohamad as "recalcitrant" for refusing to attend the 1993 APEC summit. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:02, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, sorry - Jayron and Baseball Bugs got it - I was giving situations where a passport would be needed, Aus-Malaysia was an example of crossing an international border, 'recalcitrant' was fairly specifically referring to the UK's decision to remain outside the Schengen zone despite our EU membership, so wheras you can drive from Spain to Poland without ever needing papers, as soon as you get on the boat at Calais you'll need documents. Apologies for being unclear --Saalstin (talk) 14:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If OP is talking about an airport in the USA, you can find the requirements at the TSA web page ID Requirements for Airport Checkpoints. Note that this page mentions the requirements are for travelers 18 and over. It doesn't specify what ID, if any, you would need if you are 16 or 17; maybe they would accept a birth certificate in that case but it seems like a flaw in their procedures. —Citefixer1965 (talk) 01:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since that excellently-provided link says you now need a picture ID if you're in the US and are an adult, you need to contact the DMV and find out about paying extra for an "expedited" license. Or, this will cost something, but you may be able to get an expedited passport in a few days if you have your birth certificate and passport photos on hand. Tempshill (talk) 03:49, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps when the child itself shows some spontaneous interest in long distance running - as opposed to the parent wishing the child to do it. 86.4.181.14 (talk) 07:15, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
800 metres is not long distance. And 3 miles and more is far too much too soon for a young child. But why do you want to initiate the child ? If you run yourself he or she will either follow, or not. You cannot force a child into something against their understanding of themselves.86.197.17.161 (talk) 12:32, 22 August 2009 (UTC)DT[reply]
Prsuming your child has already shown interest - otherwise there is no point in trying to get them to - the best thing to do is to make it fun. Start them off with walking - various charities have walks - for cancer, for instance - where a chlid might walk with his or her parents for a certain stretch, and raise money for that cause. Once they are used to the distance, then is when I would suggest getting them to maybe be used to doing it faster. A nice side benefit is that they learn about helping others, too.Somebody or his brother (talk) 16:34, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It also says, though, that "the onset of common cold symptoms can be caused by acute chilling of the feet". The BBC has a video here (from the same source as cited in our article) saying that hot drinks relieve the symptoms. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7773655.stm ...whether this makes the actual cold better or worse, I couldn't say. (I haven't watched the video, hope it's good.) 81.131.6.207 (talk) 19:17, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In this time of flu pandemic the CDC advise[8] "drink clear fluids (such as water, broth, sports drinks, electrolyte beverages for infants) to keep from being dehydrated". When a patient has a fever it is helpful to cool the forehead by a wet cloth[1]. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Traditions in a few countries say that cold water is bad for the stomach because of the temperature contrast. I don't know of any studies on its efficacy. Steewi (talk) 03:44, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose chilled liquids could cause the phlegm in your throat to tighten up. I drink lots of water, juice, etc. when I have a raw sore throat, but I drink peppermint tea if I've got a lot of gunk in my mouth/throat. That seems to work better for me. As always, your family doctor gets paid well to keep up with this kind of thing. Matt Deres (talk) 13:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sheepskin Boats in Xinjiang
I was just made aware of 羊皮筏子 , or "sheepskin rafts" (according to Google Translate). What are these (is there a more precise name than "sheepskin raft"?) Why don't we have an article on them? Photos seem plentiful. I'm told that these boats are made in Western China or Xinjiang. Nimur (talk) 20:56, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's a comprehensive article (in Chinese) at Baidu Baike. Perhaps an interested editor could use that as a basis to work up an article in the Chinese Wikipedia (which, given its Hong Kong / Taiwan selection bias, has no article on the object), and translate it into English. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Access or lack thereof is not what I was referring to AstroHurricane001. The editors on Chinese wikipedia are disproportionately from outside mainland China. Many of these seem to feel very strongly about certain issues (as Chinese editors everywhere seem to do). Added to this was the long periods of blockage from mainland China -- the result is that Chinese Wikipedia has very heavy coverage on controversial political issues, and also matters concerning areas outside mainland China, especially Taiwan - and really quite scant coverage of more general topics. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 03:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Simple family trees
I'm might create, unless there is another one online, a bit of a family tree for the British lords, Royal families, that sort of thing. What I'm asking is whether there is a cut-down free piece of software - for Vista or Ubuntu - that only handles simple data, like name, birth/death date and preferably another line suitable for title. Obviously, I could do this some other way, but it's the constant rearranging that such programs usually do well that I want. The sort of thing that can produce German monarchs family tree sort of thing, except so it's easy to add people and the program do the fitting (not necessarily as compactly). I'm aware I'm not being quite as clear as I could be, but simplicity with the program is key - I've seen lots with multiple notes, pictures, adding people outside the tree, etc., which would be good if doing detailed analysis of one's own family, but not what I'd most like. - Jarry1250[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]21:22, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe you're looking for something like the Plantagenet Roll of the Blood Royal [9] which has this information in database form. Good luck if you're wanting to put this on a family tree! However I do note this: "Lines are traced out in descendency tables until about the middle of the 19th Century" so it may be that some of the work has been done for you. --TammyMoet (talk) 09:42, 23 August 2009 (UTC) If that's not enough for you, add the Tudor Roll of the Blood Royal with its 35000 plus entries [10]. --TammyMoet (talk) 15:21, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
football question
If you play football for Army, or Navy or whatever, do you have to actually join or be in the US Army or US Navy or do they make exceptions so that they are not limiting the pool of players for their team? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.125.129.73 (talk) 22:00, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm almost morally certain that you have to be a cadet or midshipman in the United States Military Academy (West Point, NY), United States Naval Academy (Annapolis, MD), United States Air Force Academy (Colorado Springs, CO) or the United States Coast Guard Academy (New London, CT) to play on the team that informally bears its service's name (there's no major "Marine Corps" team, because the U.S. Marine Corps, coming under the Navy Department, has recruited Annapolis graduates instead of operating a parallel academy.) And after you either graduate from or leave the academy, you'd have to serve several years in the relevant service. I'm no fan of or expert in American football, but I remember that one of Navy's star players in the 1960's went straight into service once he'd graduated and received his naval commission. I think that recruitment of high-school athletes by the service academies differs from the recruitment of other students, but they have to meet the same admissions and performance standards. —— Shakescene (talk) 22:27, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're probably thinking of Roger Staubach, who served his full five-year commitment of active Navy service before beginning his pro career. On the other hand, David Robinson (basketball), and perhaps other more-recent service-academy athletes, have had their period of active service reduced (to two years in Robinson's case) so that they could go off and make the big bucks in the pros. Deor (talk) 22:41, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why do they feel they need to play though them and etc? Especially, when they had consecutive ones as well. Should they be on the DL (Disabled List) the minimum time or the maximum amount of time or what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicaabruno (talk • contribs) 03:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't understand your question. I think you might be missing a few words in the first sentence. Why do athletes feel the need to (do what)? As far as their placement on a disabled-list, I think policies for dealing with different injuries vary from sport to sport; and from league to league. Nimur (talk) 03:41, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the section title was part of the question. Therefore, the full question should be :
Why do athletes (especially proffesional ones) need to go through concussions. Especially, when they had more than one of them. Should they be on the disabled list by a mininum or maximum amount of time? Warrior432104:32, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for all of your answers to my question here and both were interesting. Sorry, for question not being more clearer in the 1st place.
I'm assuming that OP means something like 'why are professional sportspeople allowed to continue to perform despite having suffered concussions'. The disabled list is used in baseball and players are put on it to allow them to recover from injuries, including concussion such as Scott Rolen [11], I don't know if other sports have similar rules. Mikenorton (talk) 14:13, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In American football, practice has been to adhere to a 'three-strike rule' for concussion (i.e. enforced retirement after the third occurrence) but there is a lot of discussion about this as there's little scientific evidence to back it up [12].Mikenorton (talk) 14:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2. The chicken/mushroom has been 'creamed' meaning that there are no chunks or bits of chicken/mushroom left - giving a homogenous and creamy constitution.
You have soups that are milk-based and soups that are water-based. I suppose you could add milk to your chicken noodle soup, but that just doesn't seem like it would go so well compared with adding it to a "creamed" soup. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots14:15, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the more I read the question, the weirder it seems. He's asking why a cream soup is called "cream of" something. Isn't that a tad obvious? You wouldn't call it "coca-cola of mushroom". It has cream, or it's of creamy consistency, so it's "cream of". And if it has mushrooms, it's "cream of mushroom". Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots14:51, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. Cream of X usually means cream you have extracted from X, which is tricky where X == chicken. In Simple England it would perhaps be called "Cream and Chicken Soup". --Sean15:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody makes cream of cow soup, probably because the name would be too confusing. That's probably also why they don't make soup from cream produced from lactating chickens. 81.131.65.117 (talk) 18:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Which brings me back to my suggestion, meaning the best of. You cannot extract the dairy product cream from mushrooms, but you can use the best of it. In French the expression is "la crème de la crème", which can be applied to all kinds of situations, such as selecting the best people from university. -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 19:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Taxi from Upper West Side to JFK
Hi all. I'll be in NYC in the next week (first time there). I'll be staying in the Upper West Side. I have a flight at 10:45am at JFK on a weekday (domestic flight). What time should I leave to get there in time (assuming I catch a taxi)? Also, does the $45 flat fee (+ tip + tolls) apply when going from Manhatten to JFK? Or is only when it's the other way around. If it doesn't apply, how much would the taxi be? Thanks all. - Akamad (talk) 12:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(tangentially responsive answer) If the taxi doesn't work for you, I can recommend airport shuttles (I've used Supershuttle, but there are several companies) - they take you door to door for much less than a taxi. As they carry another 8 or so people they tend to be a bit slower (on average half those people will be collected off before you, but always in the same part of town) and the nice thing is you get a bit of a tour of the area for free (which is good if you're a first-time tourist, but a pain if you're in a hurry). As for times, you tell them (on their website) which flight you're getting and they tell you when they'll pick you up. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk13:44, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Our article on the Northwest Passage shows three possible routes, one of which passes just north of King William Island. What about the channel south of that island? It appears to me that it is
open as of yesterday [14] So is it valid to say the Northwest Passage is open now (i.e. could be easily passed through with a non-ice-hardened vessel)? 69.140.12.180 (talk) 13:55, 23 August 2009 (UTC)Nightvid[reply]
The waters at some points south of King William Island are very shallow indeed - when Amundsen left Gjoa Haven, Nunavut to head west to finish his traversal of the route in Gjøa, they had a heck of a job navigating, finding water deep enough to pass. And Gjøa is a _tiny_ boat. Things are probably a bit better now (I don't know by how much the sea level has really risen, as opposed to just the ice melting sooner), but you're not going to be putting a decent sized ship through there for a long time, if ever. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk14:00, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cruise ships (since 1984), such as MV Orlova sister to MV Clipper Adventurer, Northern Transportation Company Limited vessels and 25ft sailing boats have been going through the NWP for many years now including into Gjoa Haven. Some of those cruise ships have very shallow draughts so water depth isn't a problem. The NWP opens up every year and ships are able to pass through. However, by the end of October it will be closed again. When people talk about the NWP being open it's sometimes hard to figure out if they are talking about the usual summer season opening or the full year round opening which would occur due to global warming. I've found that quite a few people don't realise that the NWP is open every year but imagine that it is always ice covered. Of course there have been changes over the last few years. For the first time last year we got a re-supply, sealift, from Montreal and not just from Hay River due to the ice breaking up sooner than normal. Enter CambridgeBayWeather,waits for audience applause,not a sausage14:46, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What kind of sailing ship can be piloted/maintained by 4-5 people? The ship should be able to hold decent amount of stuff and can house a boarding party of 50-100 people. The ship should of course be highly maneuverable. Cannon numbers are not prioritized.--121.54.2.188 (talk) 00:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No! Need minimum of two watches. But in any case why carry boarders? The crew of a pirate ship were sailors first, fighting men second. What would the 'passengers' do whilst waiting for the next fight? And who will man the cannon ?86.202.27.172 (talk) 15:20, 24 August 2009 (UTC)DT[reply]
Indeed; one would be hard-pressed to find a modern sailing ship capable of accommodating a hundred men for any length of time which could be sailed by only five people — and that's with the aid of electric winches, autopilots, and no one to man the cannons, swab the decks, or mend the sails. Four to five people actively operating the ship means just two or three awake and on deck at any given time — and one of those is going to be at the wheel. Your boarding parties are going to have to do something besides acting as ballast, or you're never going to be able to put to sea. (Heck, just maintaining a brisk rate of fire requires four men to each cannon, though you can get by with less if your intent is to just fire a single broadside of grapeshot as you come alongside with the boarding parties.) Per APL, a historically-accurate choice would be some sort of Bermuda sloop.
Anyone with an interest in fictional combat in the age of sail would be well-advised to pick up some Horatio Hornblower books. They're all quick reads, with stories set mostly during the Napoleonic wars. You'll want to have a copy of Wikipedia's article on sail plans handy. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:58, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was guessing that he's imagining a situation where the ship would carry some large number of pirates, but would later be used briefly by the small number of people (For a quick get-away, for example.) This sort of thing happens all the time in novels and films. (Recall Cpt. Jack and Turner capturing a small brig in Pirates of The Caribbean.) I don't know enough about ships to know how realistic these scenarios are. APL (talk) 15:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OP here, yup the plot is similar as APL said. They attacked a merchant ship, underestimated the enemies actual number (it's not exactly a merchant ship) and got almost wiped out. I guess I just have to let some crew live then but still focus on at least five characters. To TenOfAllTrades, will read the novels if I find it in a second hand book store. Are they available online though? It looks like they're reaching public domain status.--121.54.2.183 (talk) 06:17, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have a Nokia 2500c-2b. Got it recently. Today I took three photgraphs but for the life of me I canlt figure out how to access them from the phone. I am not good with this stuff. I'm sure this may be extremely basic to some of you but it's not to me. I figured out how to take photographs; you go to menu → my stuff → multimedia → camera and then its shows whatever you point it at and you click "capture". It even makes a little shutter click when you do it. Okay I took three photographs (that I'd really like to retrieve!) so I've spent about an hour trying to figure where they are on the phone! I can't find them. The only other option in multimedia is recorder. When I click on camera, it just goes back into camera mode ready to take another photo. I would have thought once you took a photograph there'd by a folder in there for "taken photographs" or something like it. Anyway, I just googled the phone model and "manual" and didn't find a manual. I also had to take the battery out for a moment because the model number is behind it and I'm hoping doing so didn't wipe the photo memory if it exists. If you can tell me where the photographs are, maybe you can also tell me how I send them to my email? Help!:-)--Lady in polka dot (talk) 03:56, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh my god I figured it out! The person who created the name for the folder deserves a spanking. It's in "Open Tones & Gr." Now how anyone could find it there other than doing what I did which was fumbling in the dark for an hour and a half is beyond me. Now, there's an option for "send", but it only allows me to type in a phone number. How do I email it to myself?--Lady in polka dot (talk) 04:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Nokia site has various manuals to download, but not the one for the 2500 (although they actually have six regional sites, so possibly the different sites have different lists of manuals). You could try looking for hints in the manuals for the two phones with the nearest product numbers (I think it was the 2330 and the 2600 or something like that). 213.122.37.163 (talk) 09:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In terms of emailing it to yourself, that is only going to be possible if you have email enabled on your phone. That is a network provider issue, not a phone issue. Check with your network provider. A better alternative would be to connect the phone to your computer and transfer the photos to your hard drive that way. You will need some kind of USB cable, which almost certainly came with the phone. You will also need to install some software on the PC, which probably came on a disk with the phone. --Richardrjtalk email09:15, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would say most low end phones period. In terms of the question, you may be able to email yourself via MMS but be aware that would likely be limited to between 100-350k per message and the phone may automatically resize the photos Nil Einne (talk) 15:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A plea in mitigation for a designer at Nokia in Finland that might save them the indignity of being spanked: how well could you translate a menu system into Finnish? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking for myself, about as un-well as possible, but if I were in such a position I would instead be prepared to spend a good deal of money employing a suitably bilingual technical author to do it for me. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 19:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I live in Ripon and am from London. How do I travel to Ravenscar from Ripon. I wish to do a painting holiday. Is there a rail station please? M. Kemp Mrs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.19.97 (talk) 10:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is no train station at Ravenscar (Ravenscar railway station was closed in 1965). The nearest stations are in Whitby and Scarborough, and the only buses to Ravenscar run from Scarborough - and there aren't many of them, so be sure to check the timetable at [15] before you travel. Direct trains run from Leeds to Scarborough, so bus from Ripon to Leeds, train to Scarborough and bus to Ravenscar would probably be the easiest way to get there. Warofdreamstalk10:57, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Transport Direct is a good website for this sort of question; it is operated by the UK government. It recommends bus to York, bus or train to Scarborough, and bus from there to Ripon. It will give you all the options and times, as well as maps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.172.19.20 (talk) 13:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can anyone kindly help me know more about the life and details of the saint Husayn and His Shrine in Qazvain,Iran.
IS there any online source for retrieving info about this ?
The picture of His shrine is availabe on the follwoing wikicommons link
Do boarding/prep school teachers actually address their students as "Mr" and "Miss" like they do in movies?
In American movies, boarding school and prep school teachers address their students as "Mr XXX" or "Miss YYY". Are they actually that formal in real life? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.79.233 (talk) 11:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's assuming they know or care who XXX or YYY is. If not, one is likely to be addressed as You boy,... At the British schools I that was so fortunate to attend, the instruction might be You boy, bend over!Cuddlyable3 (talk) 17:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At the UK boarding school I attended in the late 60s to mid 70's, one's surname only was the usual mode of address both from staff to pupils and between pupils. However, in the 6th Form (last 2 years) closer pupil friends and staff with closer than average relationships (e.g one's Housemaster) might use forenames (or nicknames), particularly in informal (non-classroom) settings. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 19:05, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When I was still active at the University, I took a complementary class in German, even though I had already studied German in high school. The teacher (a native Finnish speaker, but fluent in German) called her students "Herr so-and-so" and "Frau so-and-so" by their surnames. It's the only time I've ever been, or heard anyone else be, addressed by their surname by their teacher. JIP | Talk20:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At my school there were some teachers that used to call us by just our last names (as in no "Mr"). I can't remember any that kept the Mr in, but it might have happened. TastyCakes (talk) 20:20, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At my high school - which was one of the oldest government funded schools in the country (Chatham House Grammar School) they tried to keep the 'old ways' alive - and indeed everyone (even good friends) would use each other's surnames and teachers would prefix with "Mister". SteveBaker (talk) 00:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To echo Adam and Marco's recollections, I taught at a traditional public high school in the United States (until just this last June), and I called students "Mr. XXXX" or "Miss XXXX" on at least an occasional basis, if not more frequently. I am (some would say) a bit needlessly eccentric, but I think if this was my practice at least part of the time in a public school environment, then surely at least some prep school teachers must do so at least a majority of the time. How many it would take is up to the OP--would one be enough?--but I suspect the answer is "yes, at least a few teachers do." Jwrosenzweig (talk) 00:32, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Crossng Croatian land borders
I am hoping to soon visit many countries in eastern Europe on an extended road trip in my own, UK registered car. As a British citizen and passport holder, would I likely encounter any difficulties with officialdom crossing from Slovenia into Croatia, and later from Croatia into Hungary? I have an alternative plan to avoid Croatia entirely, should it prove too difficult. Astronaut (talk) 14:48, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely no problem. It takes a minute or two and you have the added bonus of getting your passport stamped (as Croatia is non-EU). The Hungarian crossing should be even quicker, as you are re-entering the EU. Fribbler (talk) 15:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My experience driving from Italy to Croatia was stressful. Car hire companies in Venice flatly refused to let me take their car across the border. (After searching I found one dealer in Venice with one Scenic that was my only choice.) The border was unlike the relaxed or non-existent (Schengen area) borders we are used to in Europe. It had armed guards and they demanded Give us your original car papers because copies will not do. Now I understood the reluctance of hire companies because I am told that stolen cars taken into former Yugoslavia are never seen again. However after the border, Slovenia was just a few km to drive through and there was no difficulty proceeding to Croatia where we enjoyed our holiday. People are friendly (tourists welcome, we saw many Germans) and the town Porec was memorable. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 17:43, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, take the log book. It's stolen car trafficking that the customs are concerned about. Also consider sticking one of those "GB" stickers on the back of your car as this can make things even faster. Fribbler (talk) 11:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've done Slovenia --> Croatia no problem. I don't think we needed any car-related papers, only passports (UK citizen). I did the Italy --> Slovenia bit, also not stressful for that reason. (It was stressful, but that's because we took the wrong turning at the roundabout immediately outside the airport!) I imagine Croatia --> Hungary might be more problematic. The best idea's to pick tourist time, IMO, and hope they wave you through most of it. They're only human, after all. - Jarry1250[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]18:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Stadium lighting
How many white LEDs would it take to light a stadium as bright as the bulbs currently used? Would there be a significant energy saving by replacing stadium lights with LEDs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.36.216.183 (talk) 18:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that there would certainly be less energy spent on lighting the field -- but there would be no saving, because energy, by law, is always conserved :) I say that because LED's, from what I understand, consume so much less energy to light than incandescent bulbs. Not that this is a proof, but the 2005 Honda Accords have one bulb in each brake tail light, whereas the 2007 Accords have 25 LEDs in each brake tail light. If they can serve as taillights, can they not also serve to light a field? DRosenbach(Talk | Contribs)19:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Energy is conserved, but it doesn't always take useful forms. An incandescent bulb emits lots of energy as useless infra-red. LEDs emit almost entirely in useful visible light. That is why they are more efficient, meaning they use less energy to produce the same amount of useful light. --Tango (talk) 22:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)While energy is conserved, you have to account for *all* of the energy. So while both LED's and incandescent/halogen/arc lights use the same amount of energy to produce the X,000 lumens lighting the field, they're also producing heat. The catch is that incandescents produce more heat per lumen than do LEDs. A standard incandescent, for example, produces about 15 lumens/watt, only converting 2.5~% of the electricity to light, wasting >95% as heat. An LED does about twice as well, producing about 30 lumens/watt. (Table at Luminous efficacy.) While it's true that an individual LED puts out less light than an individual incandescent, it also uses much, much less electricity (milliamps as opposed to just under an amp). So even when you put 25 of them together to match the brightness of one incandescent, you're still drawing less electricity, because less is being wasted as heat. -- 128.104.112.102 (talk) 22:37, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And towards answering the OP's question, according to the table at Luminous efficacy, it looks like of the two types of lamps likely to be used for stadium lighting, a Xenon arc lamp (30–50 lm/W) about matches the low end efficiency of LEDs (10–150 lm/W), and a metal halide lamp matches the high end (65–115 lm/W). So any energy savings would be highly dependent on the current fixture in use, and the efficiency of the LED that's replacing it. The key benefit to an LED in such an application, though, would be that LEDs tend to have a much longer service life (the bulbs don't have to be replaced as often). -- 128.104.112.102 (talk) 22:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
LED lights have a much higher initial cost than older types of light, but cost less electricity per hour of operation. The most practical applications initially will be those which have the most hour of operation per day. How many hours per year are stadium lights turned on? I expect that they are basically only on for games. This will mean a longer payback time than something like street lights which are on all night every night, or hallway lights which are on many hours every day. Edison (talk) 19:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you're looking for an absolute number it'll depend on the kind of LEDs you're looking at. You can get them up to at least 120lm [16]. I can't find a reference for how many total lumens are needed to light up a sports stadium, but if you could it'd be pretty straight forward to divide through and get a rough estimate of how many of any particular type of LEDs you would need. APL (talk) 19:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conservation of energy doesn't really apply here. Bright incandescent/arc lamps waste most of their energy producing heat and radiation in parts of the spectrum we don't see. LED's can be arranged to produce almost entirely visible light - in just the right parts of the spectrum - and they don't generate much heat. Hence you can produce the same amount of useful light with less energy. Focussing them is just a matter of designing the right reflector - I don't think that's particularly difficult. The biggest issue is likely to be the number of them you need to get the brightness...and consequently the capital cost of switching over too them. SteveBaker (talk) 00:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unassisted triple play in baseball
Baseball player Eric Bruntlett achieved a rare unassisted triple play [17]. He caught the line drive, placing the batter out. He then stepped on second base, which according to the story put out the runner previously on second, who had advanced toward third, without the need to tag that runner. Then he tagged the runner previously on first, who had advanced toward second. My question: if the runner from 2nd had reached 3rd before Bruntlett stepped on second, would he have been safe, that is could he advance a base on a caught line drive? Why didn't the runner from 1st head back to 1st, since a missed catch by the 1st baseman would presumably have left him safe on first, or did he have to be tagged by either the 1st or second baseman, unlike the runner from second? It would at least have prevented Bruntlett getting credited with the unassisted triple play, and was probably more likely of success than trying to reach second with the baseman standing on the base waiting to tag him. If he had slid under the tag and touched 2nd, would he have been safe? Edison (talk) 19:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not a baseball expert, but:
Wouldn't the runner starting on second be forced to return to second after Bruntlett caught the ball, and before proceeding to third?
Here is the break down of the three outs. Before Francourt hit the ball, the players on first and second began stealing their next consecutive bases. So, when Bruntlett caught the fly ball, the batter was out (1). When an out is made on a fly ball, the runners need to tag up to their respective bases before continuing on to the next base even if they make it there before the out is made. Therefore, Bruntlett tagging second base made the player that was initially on second base and now on third base and probably rounding home out (2). The player on first base was already at second base so Bruntlett tagged him (3), although he could have thrown the ball back to first to get it tagged which would have given him an assisted triple play. Even if the player on first base slid in to second, it wouldnt have mattered that he made it because he did not tag up to first base. So if he was standing on base and Bruntlett tagged him, he still would have been out. Does that help? Livewireo (talk) 20:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, from a strategy standpoint, the Mets were down by two runs. Jerry Manuel was banking on the hope that Francourt could hit a single while the runners were advancing and get either one or both runners home for a tie. Livewireo (talk) 20:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See Unassisted triple play for a full list of occuances of the UTP in major leage baseball history. It is technically possible to have one a third base (I have seen it in a little league game my brother was in once), every major league occurance has occured at second in roughly the same manner as Bruntlett did it. --Jayron3220:34, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not exactly. Johnny Neun, who had the only other unassisted triple play to end a game in history, was a first baseman. He caught the line drive, and tagged out the runner from first who was headed to second, then ran over to second to make the force. So a different position player and a different sequence, although there was a force at second in both cases.--SPhilbrickT22:07, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Such play are extremely rare not because they are difficult to execute, but that the circumstances needed to attempt one are very narrow. You need a minimum of 2 baserunners, there must be 0 outs, and unless the runners are acting in an unintelligent manner, you probably will need the batting team to be attempting a hit and run play, right to a fielder. It would be like hitting a single roulette number, but it only counts if it is the third Sunday in October, the moon is full, and the wind was blowing NNW at 8 mph. Googlemeister (talk) 20:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Baseball players acting in an unintellegent manner has been typical of the Mets pretty much all season, so I'm not suprised this happened to them. Livewireo (talk) 20:58, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I thought that maybe there was a force at work which somehow affected the previous first and second base runners differently. The runner from 1st was not forced as soon as the ball was caught, because the batter was out. That removed the force on the runner from second, as well, correct? The 2nd baseman stepping on 2nd outed the previous 2nd base runner,who was on or nearing third. No going back. The runner from first, seeing the 2nd baseman off base catch the ball, should have headed back for 1st base, even if he had miraculously reached 2nd before the 2nd baseman caught the ball, with some slim chance of tagging 1st before a throw from the 2nd baseman to the 1st baseman with the 1st baseman standing on 1st. In gradeschool/highschool/sandlot ball, a baseman catching a thrown ball is no certainty, though it is expected in the pros. There would have been no need for a rundown between 1st and second, or tagging of the runner from 1st, if the 1st baseman had received the ball and stepped on 1st, correct? Should this count, in some sense, as an error by the runner from 1st? (Special for Baseball Bugs: Who's on first?) Edison (talk) 00:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On the hit-and-run play, typically the runners are well on their way to the next base when the ball is caught, and it's just a matter of the fielder being in the right place to quickly tag second base and then run over and tag the first base runner before he can reverse his momentum. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots01:39, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keeping unused phne numbers - normal?
A local school district (Midwest United States) closed a school 1.5 years ago. The number is still in our new phone book from last month, and was last year, too. Is this common? Do businesses often do this, if they think they might need the numbers again? I know #s can be claimed right away if they become unused, and I guess a few hundred dollars for 10 phone numbers won't break a school district's budget. It just seems weird. (Then again, I'm not used to dealing with budgets over a few hundred bucks, period. :-) 4.68.248.130 (talk) 19:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What happens if you dial it? I'll bet it's not dead, but goes to the board of education. Lots of people and organisations will have had a note of that number, some of them out of the area who don't know the school has closed, so the school district wants to keep the number going so that such callers get attended to my someone. It's pretty standard practice in large organisations to keep and redirect phone numbers for sites that have moved or closed, even if they're sure they'll never re-open the same site. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk19:31, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bear in mind also that no annually published phone book is recompiled from scratch every year, the publishers have to be told that an entry from the previous issue requires change or deletion; sometimes that information may not have been forwarded correctly or at all. Also, the lead time for revising such a data-packed reference is not trivial; depending on the methods used for compilation, checking and printing, the deadline for incorporating changes might be up to several months before publication. Finally, if the school in question was part of some larger organisation (being British, I have no knowledge of US local government), the phone bill may be still be being paid merely through oversight or poor administration.87.81.230.195 (talk) 08:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How do drum magazines work?
Google image search shows that some (Thompson drums) are in a spiral, but others look like a single circle with bullets stacked 3 rounds wide around the middle. How does the spring work? 24.6.46.177 (talk) 20:56, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Should I really say 'thank you'?
I brought my daughter to synagogue on Saturday and the president, having never seen her before, said, "She's beautiful." I didn't want to say thank you, because I didn't really see how that was a compliment to me. Saying that I have a beautiful wife, now that would be a compliment, because I can imagine it sort of increases someone's appreciation of who I am that I can "get a catch like that." But a beautiful daughter...that's just chromatin. Any thoughts? DRosenbach(Talk | Contribs)22:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't really matter whether it was a compliment or not. What matters is whether or not it was intended as a compliment, and it probably was. (It might have been a compliment intended for your daughter, just directed at you for rhetorical effect, but that doesn't really matter.) If you don't feel like saying thank you, the alternative is to agree with him ("Yes, she is."), that directs the compliment towards her, regardless of where he was aiming it. --Tango (talk) 22:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(after ec) You don't thank the president because your daughter is beautiful. You thank the president for a compliment that he didn't have to give. You thank him for your daughter because making her happy makes you happy (right?). Vimescarrot (talk) 22:22, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
: (After ec)
It was intended as a compliment, it was directed at you, you say "thank you". (I do not have a reference handy, but I believe this is correct.) If it helps, feel free to think of yourself as accepting the compliment on behalf of your entire family as a whole. APL (talk) 22:27, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But is it a compliment? To praise one for having brown hair is odd, so isn't it the same for anything genetic. I would say that praising someone for their intellect is slightly different, because one merely has the potential of intellect that he or she chooses to develop and/or express. But beauty? Is that really any more than flattery? DRosenbach(Talk | Contribs)22:43, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's an awkward moment, frankly, and that's why you hesitated. There's not much distance between "She's beautiful" and "She's hot", and in my opinion neither one is appropriate at a religious service, which is supposed to be about the spiritual, not the physical. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots23:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you say a 2 year old is "Beautiful" - it's OK, and it's polite whether true or not. If you say a 2 year old is "Hot" it had better be abundantly clear that it's a joke - or else it's pretty sick! If your 18 year old is either "beautiful" or "hot" - that's an entirely different matter. Context matters! I think "Thank you" is the best response in any case. SteveBaker (talk) 00:07, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hell, at a wedding, the bride is beautiful even if she looks like Nanny Ogg. Babies are by definition beautiful, too. this is a big deal about a simple exchange or courtesies, which might well be lies. I would go with the "Yes, she is" myself. PhGustaf (talk) 01:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are both physical and spiritual kinds of beauty so we can speculate what particular beauty the president observed in the OP's daughter. Maybe the president is just a friendly person who means what he says without making a strategical calculation out of it. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think regardless of where it was, religious context or not, I think telling someone their 2 year old daughter is beautiful is a compliment more to the parents then the child. The only thing clouding the issue is people applying the incorrect and inappropriate meaning to the word "beautiful". A sunrise is beautiful, no need to "read into it" inappropriate meaning. A two year old girl is beautiful when she is healthy, happy, groomed, well behaved (etc) which are more of a reflection of the parents then the 2 year old, therefore it's completely appropriate to take it as a compliment as a proud parent. In contrast if exactly the same girl was a snotty brat, she probably wouldn't receive that compliment, genuinely anyway..Vespine (talk) 01:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For some unknown reason, I was thinking he was taking an adult or at least teen daughter. Duh! If it's a 2-year-old and some guy says she's hot, obviously it's time to call the cops. If it's a young child, though, it still seems a little odd for a synagogue official to be commenting on her being beautiful, as if that had anything to do with anything. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots01:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Two things that haven't been mentioned. 1) 'Beauty' isn't entirely genetics. Diet and other factors you have an influence over can play a part. (This will include the pregnant mother's condition and diet of course.) For a 2 year old there may not be that much difference provided the parents provided reasonable care but still some 2) It isn't just your genetics that play a part. It's the combination. If you believe a complement of your wife reflects well on you then surely a complement of your daughter 'genes', who has half of your wife's 'genes' is partly a complement of you getting a 'catch like that'. At a more complex level, you could also say it's a complement of both of you in choosing a good match of 'genes' to give a beautiful daughter. Of course as someone mentioned above, this is way too technical, it's unlikely the president cared much what your daughter looked like (all babies are beautiful) and almost definitely didn't think at such a complex level. It was intended as a simple complement regardless of whether it was taken as such. Nil Einne (talk) 02:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1) I picked my wife out of all the girls in the dental school lounge because of her eyebrows (and that's my daughter, too).
2) Next time someone comments on my daughter's beauty, I'll be right and ready to request an elaboration of the specific intention :)
Taking account of the context, it seems to me that the most beautiful answer is the given by OP's. Indeed, no answer means that the person was somehow not prepared to the compliment, as if he's not aware of his and his family's qualities; a kind of modest attitude that is very appreciated in a young man. Also, it may indicate that in that moment he was somehow more inclined to meditation, another small thing that also might not go unnoticed. --pma (talk) 10:31, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously, you should have stopped and explained to the man that your two year old daughter's beauty was primarily genetic in origin and not the result of any extraordinary intellectual or creative exercise on your part beyond the superficial trappings of good hygiene and appropriate dress. I'm sure he would have appreciated the correction and thought more carefully before he made such offhand remarks to you again. APL (talk) 15:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The OP's puzzlement mirrors that of the man who announces to friends that his wife is pregnant, and the friends congratulate him heartily on the achievement. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 07:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rusting cars
Years ago I bought a cheap wheelbarrow to use in my garden. It is just a pressed galvanised steel pan mounted on a tubular frame with a rubber wheel. In Summer I use it to carry all kinds of rocks, earth and rubbish and in Winter it stands outside in all weathers, often filling with snow and water. My point is that it has not rusted. Along the roads I see steel lamp posts and road signs that stand for years and also don't rust. But every car rusts. One need only look underneath, especially at the sills and doors, of a 5+ year old car to see the rust. In particular, I bought a used Lamborghini which is far from an economy priced car, and found it was rusted through. My question is Why can't anyone make a steel car that stays as rust free as my wheelbarrow? If the answer lies in the cost of properly galvanising a car, what would that add to the cost of a typical family car? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Most rust on a car starts with stone chips damaging the underseal or paintwork; your wheelbarrow doesn't barrel up the motorway at 100mph taking hundreds of chips. Secondly, in many countries (such as the UK) salt is used to keep winter roads free of ice, and that salt is a major cause of rust; in the wet period after a thaw your car is assaulted by torrents of brine spraying up from the road (into those nice fresh chip-holes). -- Finlay McWalter • Talk23:35, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To get rust, you need salt, water AND air. When your wheelbarrow sits there full of water, there is water - but no air - and very little salt. When your car is sprayed with water - there is air and water in close proximity. If there are any seams or cracks it can get into, then air and water in close proximity will make things rust. Salt also make a lot of difference. In the UK, where everywhere is close to the ocean and the roads are salted in the winter - an exposed bit of metal will show signs of rust in a matter of days. Here in north/central Texas, we are a very long way from the ocean, there is little or no need to salt the roads. Although the annual rainfall is higher than the south of England - it comes down in a few intense 3" rainstorms - and any remaining raindrops evaporate off very rapidly in the hot climate. In the UK, it drizzles small amounts of water for months on end keeping things wet for a long period of time. I accidentally backed my scruffy old pickup truck into a tree once - and a 6" diameter chunk of paint fell off revealing bare steel (an '87 Ford Ranger is not exactly a 'quality' vehicle!). Five years later when I sold the truck, the steel still looked shiney - no rust in sight! So if your wheelbarrow doesn't get salty - and if the water sits in a large solid volume (thereby keeping the air out) - then I don't see why it shouldn't last a long time. SteveBaker (talk) 00:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It has been done on occasion. The DeLorean DMC-12 (made famous by the Back to the Future films) had a stainless steel exterior — completely impervious to rust. The downside is that it is very difficult to get paint to adhere properly to stainless steel, so production DeLoreans were only sold with the naked steel finish. While the body will never rust, removing or concealing dings, dents, and scratches in a cosmetically-acceptable way is very challenging. Further, stainless steel is both more expensive as a material, and significantly more difficult to work, than regular (rustable) steels, which greatly increases the cost of the body.
There's probably a certain amount of planned obsolescence at work; automakers see no reason to build vehicles which last too long. Most consumers are reluctant to pay any significant premium for a promise of automotive longevity. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But they galvanize ships (I know this from http://rudimentsofwisdom.com/pages/zinc.htm). Then again, I guess a ship has a lot more weight compared to surface area, and so needs relatively less zinc. Then again again, by the same reasoning you'd think that if the weight of the zinc that coats the surface was significant to a car's performance, it would make the wheelbarrow uselessly heavy. 81.131.63.211 (talk) 14:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ships aren't galvanised. They have sacrificial anodes (essentially lumps of zinc) bolted to them to corrode away in preference to the steel, but the steel isn't itself zinc-plated. The anodes are periodically replaced. 93.97.184.230 (talk) 00:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Athletes, especially pro ones and general injuries
Why do they feel they need to play though them and etc? Especially, when they have more then one of them as well. Should they be on the DL (Disabled List) the minimum time or the maximum amount of time or what for the injury/ies? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicaabruno (talk • contribs) 23:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It seems more heroic that way; fans will think of you as a crybaby or something if you don't "play through the pain", especially if it's during the playoffs. I think there is a certain feeling that if they make all these millions of dollars, they don't deserve to sit around doing nothing, if it is perceived as a minor injury. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:11, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's also the problem that a pro athelete's career is remarkably short. The average NFL player has a career less than 4 years long; even stars can't be expected to play much more than into their mid 30's. With such a short productive lifespan, atheletes need to get as much as possible out of it.
Taking extra time off for injuries is perceived as allowing other atheletes to take ones place; and once you are on the bench it can be hard to come back off again. The attitude even has a name; its is sometimes called "Wally Pipp syndrome", after Wally Pipp, who was a very good Yankees first baseman during the 1910's & 1920's. According to legend (entirely approcryphal, but important for our story) he voluntarily took a day off in 1925, and his replacement that day was an untested prospect off the bench by the name of Lou Gehrig. Gehrig would not sit on the bench again for 2,130 games. Thus "Wally Pipp syndrome" is the desire never to take a day off for the fear that the guy who takes your place for one day may keep it forever, leaving you out of a job. It happens frequently in all sports, look at these examples:
Trent Green was injured in preseason of the 1999, and replaced by journeyman quarterback Kurt Warner who won the league MVP and the Super Bowl that year; Green was later cut, and toiled with some horrible teams in Kansas City. Green was for many years viewed as the best quarterback on the worst teams, and all because he got hurt and was replaced by a nobody.
Drew Bledsoe was a frequently great quarterback for the New England Patriots, frequent pro bowl quarterback who brought the Pats to a Super Bowl. He gets hurt in the second game of the 2001, only to be replaced by a 7th round draft pick, a nobody named Tom Brady, who wasn't even the full-time starter in college. Brady has gone on to become the best Quarterback of the past decade, while Bledsoe was shipped off to Buffalo and never had a stellar season again.
Bill Walton had one of the best College Basketball careers in history; and even won an NBA championship with the Portland TrailBlazers, yet everyone remembers Walton as a "Malingerer" who's frequent leg and back injuries kept him on the bench for much of his career. Most people remember Walton, not for his college career, but waving a towel on the Celtics bench for much of the 80's.
So, its probably the fact that most of these guys believe that there's someone just waiting to take their job away from them that keeps them playing through injuries. Remember, the guy that takes your job while you are hurt doesn't necessarily want to give it up when you get better. Ask Wally Pipp! --Jayron3202:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I need input. I get to be a bridesmaid for a close friend in October, which is awesome. The wedding is on the east coast; I am on the west coast. I've never had to buy my own plane tickets before. Where can I get a flight for as little money as possible? I like flying, so I don't care too much about the relative quality, but I don't have a whole lot of disposable income. Any advice / personal experiences would be vastly appreciated! --Masamage♫05:09, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
East Coast and West Coast are usually (though not always) Americanisms, in my experience. Combined with WP's systemic bias, I'm willing to hazard a guess.
My uncle, who travels a fair amount to medical conferences, loves Travelocity, which I have also found to be very good; I haven't tried Expedia; I know Travelocity gives quite a few different airlines, and offers options of search for straight through flights or ones with stops.
(ec) Low cost airlines are cheap, but pile on the extras if you want anything resembling service. Buy online with a credit card. Check-in online too, or use the same credit card to print your own boarding pass at the airport. Try to carry only carry-on bags (but maybe a bridesmaid's dress won't fit). It might be a good idea to take and smaller, lighter but still acceptable, dress in your carry-on bag in case the airline loses your checked bag. You might have to change at a hub somewhere (Atlanta, Dallas/Fort Worth, Chicago, Denver) unless you are going between major cities such as LA - NY. For example using Travelocity, I found many direct flights LAX -> JFK, for ~$250 return, but for something a little different (Santa Barbara -> Philly) it costs ~$100 more, there are fewer flights and you need to change at least once (usually Denver on that route with United Airlines). Astronaut (talk) 12:09, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I often find that cheaptickets.com or kayak.com seem to give cheaper tickets than the more famous aggregators (expedia and travelocity). But, as DTF says, the cheapest I've seen are in ticket sales listed only on the airline's websites, so I'd suggest looking at Jetblue or Southwest or some other airline to make sure. TastyCakes (talk) 14:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In my experience, Southwest Airlines, which does NOT book though travel sites and only sells direct to consumer, has cheaper tickets than any of the expedia/orbits/travelocity type sites. Southwest generally only flies to the smaller airports. For example, they don't fly to Logan International Airport (Boston), but do fly to Manchester-Boston Regional Airport and T. F. Green Airport (Providence), both of which have the same rental car agencies as Logan would. If you are willing to fly into such smaller airports (or indeed, if such airports are actually closer to where you want to go), Southwest may be the best option. The downside is you generally have to fly through one of their hubs, which are BWI, Chicago Midway, and Love Field; but most trips take no more than 1-2 layovers, and since Southwest does not run a true "hub and spoke" system, it actually has MORE direct flights between smaller airports than most of the major carriers. --Jayron3216:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unless it makes you feel uncomfortable (for any reason), why not tell us what city or town (or village) you're coming from and in what town the wedding's being held. For all you know, someone reading this may have recently researched and travelled the route between the same two places (or at least their metropolitan areas) and could also tell you about hotels, food, rental cars, taxis, public transit, airport access, etc. However that person wouldn't likely be me, since I haven't flown since 1997. —— Shakescene (talk) 19:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If I may suggest, as someone who has flown coast-to-coast a lot on many carriers, going one step up from "most cheapest ever" is often in one's best interest. I find JetBlue to be the most pleasant for the East Coast/West Coast jaunt, assuming you are going to cities that don't require a lot of transfers (which may not be the case, depending on how you are flying). The seats are relatively comfortable, their staff are always courteous, and the little free TVs hypnotize everyone on the flight so it is without disruption from loud kids, etc. Also, they generally don't do the nickel-and-dime practices that make one feel so demoralized when flying these days (none of that "extra money to check a bag, to have some water, to get a cracker," etc.). If you buy in advance the price isn't all that much more than the cheap ones (a little over $300 roundtrip, even cheaper if you want to fly redeye). You can check our their prices through their own website (Jetblue.com). I have found flying on the "big" carriers (Delta, United, American) to be much, much more trouble than it is worth, and one feels like any savings you get in the ticket come right out of your own hide... --68.50.54.144 (talk) 00:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is all awesome advice. Sorry for not being more specific about the fact that, yes, I'm in the US. X) My original post was going to say which cities I was flying between, but I decided to leave that off and then forgot to replace the information. Glad it was easy to figure out! And yup, they're major cities, so it's been easy to find coverage in that sense.
Right now I am having pretty awesome luck with the smaller ticket-finding places you guys mentioned, like Kayak and Cheaptickets, and also Priceline. They tend to be equal to each other in terms of how good a deal you get. At the moment, I've already gotten down to less than half what I was looking at spending before I asked for help. :o There's some more research to be done--I'm gonna look at the JetBlue thing next--but I'm feeling much happier and comfier than I was this time yesterday. Thank you all for the input!! --Masamage♫00:19, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Definition of "male"
Here's a question I was wondering, and have yet to find a decent answer for. Let's say a biologically male individual loses his testicles, due to cancer or some other non-elective reason. Then, rather than utilize prostetic genetilia, he has his penis inverted into a neo-vagina. Now that he has female-looking genetilia, can he still legally be considered male? In short, how close can a male get to approximating a female whilst maintaining a status of "male"? 69.169.136.43 (talk) 06:28, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As the above linked article states, individuals can apply to change their birth certificates in various jurisdictions. Without doing this, (I think) they'd still be considered as their birth gender no matter what their appearance or what surgery they undergo. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 07:28, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) He can be a transvestite, have sex reassignment surgery as comprehensive as this and remain the male gender shown on his birth certificate except in areas where biological male gender is legally required, such as in professional sports, or strongly demanded such as in gender segregated bathing or child care (discrimination in these areas might be disputable) or the person has deliberately changed legal gender e.g. in U.K. or Canada. Whether a formal name change for use in documents can be straightforward varies with area. Wikipedia has an article on Legal aspects of transsexualism.Cuddlyable3 (talk) 07:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The OP's original scenario is highly improbable. A male, who has been living a satisfactory life as a male for many years, and who loses his testicles for whatever reason, is extremely unlikely to choose a sex-change operation over a simple prosthesis. With testosterone replacement, he would continue to live his life perfectly well as a man. The above responses about people changing their gender really apply to men who have been living their lives somehow "knowing" psychologically that they were supposed to be a female, for whatever reason. They are deeply at odds with their male gender identity and choose a sex change operation because it is the only means of making their external appearance congruent with their inner gender. This isn't something that someone just decides to do on a whim, and it isn't a procedure that a reputable surgeon would perform without careful consideration. --- Medical geneticist (talk) 11:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then I guess I'm in little company. I'm a heterosexual male, currently engaged to a female. If I were to lose half my genetilia, I would strongly consider losing the rest in favor of a vagina, especially if I had lost the ability to get an erection. However, I would not want to become a legal female, since that would nullify my opportunity to marry the aforementioned girl. But, according to the articles linked above, it appears that in most states, at least, I'd still be considered male for the purposes of marriage. As a side note though, I asked her about this, and she said that if I were to be reassigned to the female gender, she'd get a transgender operation as well. 69.169.136.43 (talk) 14:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst it's nice you seem to have a plan for this (unusually specific) eventuality, it isn't without cost, risk or psychological impact to go through the changes you refer to. This type of surgery is not exactly dealt with by the medical profession as an 'on a whim' surgery and it's likely that (ignoring paying for this privately) you'd find a lot of hurdles in your way.In answer to the original query - as others have noted above sex-change and the law is complicated, and it varies by region. To be honest i'm not sure what benefit you'd get from your partner becoming a male and you a female, when the only thing missing from you is genitalia. My (limited) understanding of sex-change is that this wouldn't result in a (sexually functional) you and her. ny156uk (talk) 17:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hitler often blamed the Jews for germany loosing WWI, I have been trying to find any persons of Jewish linage within the upper structure of the Central powers but to no avail. This is probably because Hitler was lying. Was there any truth in this, and if so, who were these men? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.172.58.82 (talk) 09:33, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In fact he was so deep into his own dogma that he allowed prominent Jewish scientists to leave Germany. So some Jews certainly did help to cause Germany's loss, but by devoting their efforts to help the Allies instead of Germany! Naturally, and of course, he lost a major and intelligent labour force by insisting on their destruction. So that didn't help either. Then - he devoted major resources to locating, transporting and destroying Jews that his war effort was considerably reduced. Really stupid, eh!86.219.38.195 (talk) 10:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC)DT[reply]
For a broader coverage read Stab-in-the-back legend. For a more conspiracy type theory read about http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=wilson+blackmail+untermeyer+wwi&btnG=Search&meta= - how jews blackmailed the US president Wilson into entering the war, prolonging it (at a time when there was a likelyhood of a relatively neutral peace agreement between the european powers) - I should point out that this could all be a lie, and even so Hitler may not have been aware of it.
I believe hitler's criticism of the jews was that they (allegedly) exercised control through international (ie outside the state) banking organisations etc. 83.100.250.79 (talk) 11:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would just point out that, even if there were a few Jewish individuals in leadership positions in the Central Powers, that hardly proves Hitler's claim. To back Hitler's claim, you'd need proof that those individuals conspired to undermine the Central Powers' war effort. Likewise, you'd need proof of such a conspiracy to substantiate his claim that Jewish bankers conspired against the Central Powers. To my knowledge, nobody has ever been able to substantiate these claims, and the evidence tends to refute them. Marco polo (talk) 13:34, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The question is about whether there's any evidence for Hitler's claims (the answer is no) not whether it's possible to scapegoat Jewish people Nil Einne (talk) 17:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The broad anti-Semitic strain in right-wing German nationalism after World War I, including but hardly confined to the NSDAP, blamed the Jews within the Socialist and pacifist movements for undermining morale, encouraging mutinies within the forces, discouraging patriotism and the war effort, etc. and Jewish capitalists for war-profiteering. Rosa Luxemburg was Jewish, as were Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Leon Trotsky and any number of other Marxist, socialist and trade-union leaders in many European countries, Russia and the United States. (Lenin, however, was not.) Xenophobia, including some anti-Semitism, was part of the patriotic pro-war sentiment in almost all of the belligerent powers on both sides (see for example, New York City mayoral election, 1917). And the Dreyfus Affair in France happened during a period of Franco-German tension well before World War I.
On the other hand, it's not too hard to find many Jews who sacrificed all that they had, including life, for the countries of which they were citizens. A particular embarrassment for the Nazis was dealing with Jews who'd the Iron Cross, or the equivalent Austro-Hungarian decoration, for bravery in direct combat in the trenches. Chaim Weizmann was able to lobby successfully for the Balfour Declaration partly because of the British government's gratitude for his work on gas warfare. The New York Times, owned and published by the Jewish Adolph S. Ochs, was fervently and vehemently pro-war.
The last thing, of course, anyone here should do is to re-start or pursue that argument, which is already well-documented in many relevant pages of Wikipedia, but I was trying to respond to this specific question. —— Shakescene (talk) 19:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Women in Men's Professional Sports
Is it predicted that women will be able to participate in Men's Professional Sports (US Football, US Baseball, US Basketball) in this decade? I often ask my male sport fanatics about their opinions about it and I hear two main thoughts: 1) Women are not strong enough to play along side men in men's professional sports. 2) Viewership will decrease because men will be digusted my watching women get tackled or what not. I guess the same general opinions go for women in the military. Are there any talks or predictons about this changing? --Reticuli88 (talk) 13:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
None whatsoever that I've heard of. You get the occasional stunt, like a female pitcher in the independent/minor Northern League a few years ago. And you have the occasional female golfer trying to play in a men's tournament. But major professional team sports? Very unlikely. It's not about physical strength so much as it's about culture. The same argument was made about the military as regards women, gays, etc. However, the military is run by the government, which has the power to change the military's policies. They have no such power over professional sports, which are private industry. No women on the team (only in the front office), and no move to drop politically-incorrect nicknames like "Indians", "Braves" and "Redskins". Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots13:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are some women starting to compete in certain men's professional sports, but to a large degree it does depend on their ability to compete on equal terms. For example women are starting to trickle into professional motorsports, and there was talk recently of a woman (can't remember the name) even making it onto the Formula 1 circuit. Similarly most equestrian events don't discriminate between the sex of the rider, and if I remember correctly (I don't follow the 'sport') there are now female jockeys competing at the 'professional' level. Many men (and let's be frank, a lot of women) dislike women competing in men's competitions for cultural reasons, but in most sports it is a physical/biological issue that is the real blocker. The fact is that humans do display sexual dimorphism so after puberty most sports that require physical 'combat' of some form will not mix the sexes, as males on average will be more powerful than the females, and at the peak of performance again males will have the biological advantage. So while the best women in a sport will be superior to the vast majority of men, they will not be up with the very top men (a review of world athletics records will confirm this). The same holds true for team sports. While Lauren Jackson would be a better basketballer than 99.999% of men on the planet, we are unlikely to see her in the NBA anytime soon, as those men at the top would still be better. If the promoters thought they could make money off having women competing alongside the men in professional competition they would do so; it is likely it could be a big draw, but if the standard of the competition declined or the team involved suffered due to it, it would quickly become counter-productive. --jjron (talk) 14:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The military situation is different from professional sports. The Women_in_the_military article mentions both physical concerns as well as Psychological ones. Quoting the article:
The Center for Military Readiness stated that “Female soldiers who are, on average, shorter and smaller than men, with 45-50% less upper body strength and 25-30% less aerobic capacity, which is essential for endurance”.[5]
However, an article in the Army Times July 29, 1996, states that some women do possess the physical attributes suitable to become combat soldiers.[6]
If it's about physical attributes, is it believable that out of all the women on earth - not a single one of them have physical attributes and skill set required to play on par in men's professional sports? Imho, women will eventually play in men's professional sport (if not within this decade, maybe the next).
The army is a different story, the perception of female POW being subject to sexual abuse (again, imho) sway public opinion against accepting women in combat role (at least in the US anyway). Royor (talk) 15:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh and if you scroll further down the part about IDF male soldier experienced an uncontrollable, protective, instinctual aggression and losing control after witnessing women (soldier) being wounded would agree with the average male sport event viewer being disgust about the women being hurt part. Royor (talk) 15:31, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To counteract Rayor's assertion that there must be some woman who can compete at the highest level of professional male team sports; look at it from the point of view of sports team owners and executives. They have two goals: To make money and to win. If there WAS a woman who displayed enough skill to make their team better, and such a woman would be enough of an attraction to put behinds in the seats, is there an team executive alive who would say "We'd make more money, and win more games, if we just let this woman on our team. But darn it, I just don't like women, so I would rather make less money and win less games than let a woman play". Seems even more patently rediculous. The fact is, that professional athletes represent the smallest fraction of 1% of the male population, it is actually quite believable that the best female athletes in the world do not necessarily rank among that tiny fraction of a percent. There have, however, been a few that have come close. The best example I can think of is Babe Didrikson, who is widely considered the best female athlete ever; she is still the only woman to ever make the cut at a Men's PGA event. Nancy Lieberman played in a men's basketball league (the USBL) and even for a time with the Washington Generals (the patsies of the Harlem Globetrotters). Katie Hnida played Division I-A college football, and kicked a few extra points for the University of New Mexico. Manon Rhéaume played in some minor league men's hockey games as a Goalie; she played in a few NHL exhibition games as well, but never in any game that counted. If a woman WERE ever to break into a regular season men's professional sport, Hockey goalie would be the one that minimized the physical difference between men and women, since the attributes that owe itself to netminding (flexibility and reaction time) are not ones that show a marked difference between men and women. --Jayron3216:41, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is believable that not a single woman will have the physical attributes necessary to play in a traditionally men's professional sports league* (* because remember the sports leagues are not selecting from the entire world population, a poor women in Bangladesh is unlikely to be provided sufficient nutrition nor cultural exposure to make an entrance to professional American football or basketball very likely, now cricket is much more likely); though it's highly unlikely that no woman exists that fulfills the requirements. Two lines of thought, one slightly empirical, the other anecdotal:
It may be just a matter of statistical distributions. Here are some back of the envelop calculations, with the average height of an American woman being 64 inches and the average height of an NBA player is 79 inches. The number of women in America (out of 150mil in total) that reach that height are 9000 (assuming a standard deviation of 2.8 inches). The number of men in America that reach that height are 45000 (a 5x difference). If you combine the statistical distributions of height with say 'athleticism' or any other required skill (compare the woman's world record in the 100m to the men's over time; women are currently running at the speed that was considered elite in the 1920s). It may turn out to be the case that sexual dimorphism radically constricts the number of possible candidates down to a very small number. Another issue is that I know men are typically more variable in some domains. If this is true for all domains, then this may also restrict the number of possible candidates even further.
Anecdotally, take top women's basketball players. It was considered an achievement when Candace Parker dunked in an NCAA game. Admittedly, she'd dominate a majority of men (including myself), but when you compare her to marginal NBA players, she just does seem up to their level. In many of the popular sports in America, the types of skills that women tend to be better at are not the ones required by those sports. Football requires a freakish amount of muscle and athleticism. Basketball, height and athleticism. Baseball is actually one of the few major sports that women could do well (the average height and weight for baseball players is quite reasonable, like ~6ft and ~180lbs for non-pitchers), but I suspect cultural reasons keep women out in great numbers. And baseball would counteract the issue of men not wanting to see women get tackled. Baseball does not contain many instances of raw aggression like basketball and especially football do.
Some of this will change with more focus on women's athletics, but it just doesn't seem likely to me that there will be a significant number of women who have both the physical skills and the sheer luck necessary to play at a competitive level with top men, especially in the NFL and NBA.
I actually do not necessarily buy Jayron32's reasoning about owners. Hell, it was only fairly recently that statistical analyses became common in baseball, and they are only very recently becoming popular in basketball. Ownership and management of sports teams do tend to be behind the times in many respects, so it does seem plausible that prejudice may keep women out of sports where they could compete. I do not think this is a particularly powerful effect, but it seems likely enough that it may play some role if there were viable candidates for their teams.--droptone (talk) 17:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Correcting my figures, using average height of woman to be 63.8 and 69.4 for men with a SD of 2.8 and the average NBA height is 78.98, with a population of 150mil, there are 4.4 women who meet that threshold and 46719.8 men.--droptone (talk) 00:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is 2 parts. First, the dimorphism, and second is cultural things. It is very unlikely for women to be of professional sports size, and even less likely that she has been heavily involved in that sport since youth, unlike most of the males. This means that the odds of a woman actual having the size and the skills to compete on a professional level is minuscule. It might happen at some point, but I doubt it would be more then a single instance. In the next 50 years. Googlemeister (talk) 20:57, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Setting aside the cultural issues for the moment and observing strictly physical characteristics, I would say that if it were to happen among U.S. team sports, baseball would be the most likely venue. Even among the top professional male players, there is a wide variety of body types depending on the position on the field and the role in the game, from the tall and powerful slugger to the small and agile infielder. — Michael J23:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This UK law quite rightly protects 16 and 17 year olds from abuse by people in positions of trust. It is said that 16 and 17 year olds are vulnerable from exploitation but is this also not true of an 18 year old in school and living with their parents, despite the fact they are legal adults? As an example a teacher could be prosecuted for abusing his position of trust with a 17 year old in a class he or she teachers. However if the same act is committed towards an 18 year old in the same class, no offence has been committed. The age difference between the 2 people are likely to be a few months and there are likely to be no significant differences in maturity and situation. Therefore aren't both victims of exploitation? This is slightly confusing. Clover345 (talk) 17:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The line has to be drawn somewhere, and an 18-year old is an adult, a17-year old is a minor, so it seems to be a reasonable point at which to make the distinction. DuncanHill (talk) 17:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To expand a little, a teacher of a 17-year o;d has greater legal power over that minor than he or she would have over an 18-year old pupil, so the 2003 act provides for a greater level of protection for the minor. DuncanHill (talk) 17:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And, in the case of a teacher exploiting an 18-year-old, the teacher would be subject to disciplinary action by the school, i.e. being sacked (breach of trust), and the 18 year old can actually take the case to court. I can't find any links, but it has happened a few times. However, in this case it would be a civil court and not a criminal court. I remember reading some on the BBC website. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 18:57, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think a school has the same level of care and responsibility for all of its pupils regardless of whether they are 17 or 18. Most schools tend to treat 17 and 18 year olds the same. For example, by school policy many schools require 18 year olds to have consent forms signed by their parents for school trips. Also, if a teacher exploits an 18 year old pupil, isn't there also potential he or she could exploit someone under 18? Shouldn't they at least be banned from working in schools? Clover345 (talk) 19:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After being sacked for such a thing, this would become common knowledge for all education boards across the UK, so they wouldn't be able to get a job as a teacher anyway, so it's unnecessary. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 20:29, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An inappropriate relationship with a student, 18 or not, amounts to gross misconduct under a teacher's terms of employment, and as KageTora says, anyone sacked for this offence would find it impossible to be employed again as a teacher, so they would effectively be "banned from working in schools". I suspect the moral concern is more about cases where the teacher forms a relationship with a recent ex-pupil, claiming the liaison did not start until the pupil left the school or college, or where a teacher leaves his/her job in order to have a public relationship with a pupil. Some of these relationships last, some don't - how long until you judge the relationship genuine, not exploitative? Can you formulate legislation that will allow you to tell an 18-year-old: "Sleep with anyone over 16 you like and we'll accept your right to choose, but if it's your ex-teacher then you've been brainwashed and we'll destroy his/her career"? Can you take away a person's livelihood because their spouse, to whom they are legally married, was a student in their class before they got together? I'm not soapboxing or debating - just highlighting questions that would have to be considered in any attempt to blur the legal boundary between protected children and legally independent adults. It would be very difficult to do so without treating somebody unfairly and would probably result in all sorts of unintended consequences, which is probably why we have the system we do: total legal protection until 16; a mixture of civil and legal safeguards until 18, then civil protection only. As for Ireland, US or Canada, that would depend on how thorough the schools there are about taking up references and employment history. I doubt that any of those countries is particularly lax in that respect, even for staff from overseas. Karenjc21:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Even if someone moved to a new country, any prospective employer is going to want references from prior employers. Once the new employer finds out why they were fired from their last teaching engagement, it will not usually go well for the interviewee. --Jayron3223:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Slightly off-beam but relevant nonetheless. 1 - A British soldier can die in Afghanistan at 17 but not vote in any local or national government elections until he/she is 18 - and worse - they cannot buy alcohol in the USA when on holiday. 2. What about those cases some years ago when the UK had capital punishment when 2 convicts of a joint murder charge were separated in ages by only a couple of days and the younger one - under 18 - was sentenced to life in prison - but the older one - just over 18 - was hanged - even though it was the younger one who pulled the trigger? As another respondee above pointed out - the line has to be drawn somewhere. 92.10.191.24 (talk) 23:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, and I would consider dying in Afghanistan worse than not being unable to by a Bud on holiday. But thats just me. Rockpocket01:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The question is about formal legislation and not about the case-by-case evaluation that a court would make in a molestation case. It is misleading to suggest that the law gives a go-free ticket to a teacher to molest anyone from the second the subject reaches age 18. The law is actually a restriction placed on judges. When the victim is over 17 the judgment may take his/her behaviour into consideration. Seductive behaviour would be a mitigating factor. However when the victim was known to be under 18 there can be no such mitigation. Even with consent the crime is Statutory rape. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 07:39, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The concept of statutory rape is certainly acknowledged in the UK, although not necessarily referred to in law in those exact words. It refers to sex with a girl under the age of 13, which is regarded automatically as unlawful since consent cannot be given, and for which no mitigating plea is accepted (ie you can't use "I thought she was older" or "She initiated contact" as an excuse). Sex with someone older than 13 but under the age of legal consent (16 in the UK) is a criminal offence too but some limited mitigating factors may be accepted, particularly where the other partner is a young person too. For information on the law on this subject in the UK, see the DirectgovCrown Prosecution Service website here. Karenjc19:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the line in the sand thing is relevant. The law generally aims to be as black and white as possible for reasons of simplicity, fairness etc. Enforcement and sentencing may enter more of a grey area (sometimes with clearly defined regulations) but the law as written often has this line in the sand thing. For example, drunk driving limits, speed limits etc are usually another clear line in the sand. Clearly driving at 51km/h as opposed to 50km/h in a 50km/h isn't much different, similarly 52km/h as opposed to 51km/h. But if you keep going that way you can end up at 200km/h which even most people opposed to speed limits are liable to agree is inappropriate in nearly every 50km/h. All age based laws are usually the same (there may sometimes be various specific differences, e.g. Canada's age of consent laws are a good example of that) but all these remain lines in the sand. While the above discussion is appears to be referring to secondary schools, in a number of countries it's entirely plausible these laws could apply in universities situations since 17 year olds may attend university. A 17 year old with a 50 year old professor may seem inappropriate and I presume is illegal in the UK as may an 18 year old with a 50 year old. But what if Bill Gates decides to go back to uni to get a degree and ends up in a relationship with a 25 year old tutor (male or female doesn't matter)? The tutor may still get in trouble with the university but who here is going to say the tutor was taking advantage of Bill Gates and so should be punished with a criminal offense? Or another example, a 21 year old replacement teacher with a mature (maturity is another key things, while correlated with age there are plenty of 18 years olds more mature then the average 21 year old) 18 year old student of theirs may be inappropriate. But is it really worse then a 21 year old who was in a very vulnerable state with a troubled mental history and their psychiatrist? Yet if you increase the age to 21 for example, you'll catch the former but not the later. In other words, what I'm getting at is that there always has to be a line somewhere. Anything else is best dealt with in other ways, as both these cases would be. Nil Einne (talk) 07:28, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In an ideal world, every law like this would be a gradual thing. As the age of the victim rises from (say) 12 to (say) 25, the threshold for what is considered "abuse" would become gradually less onerous and the punishment for abuse would gradually decrease accordingly. However, such things are almost impossible for the courts to judge accurately and consistantly - so such a law would be extremely hard to handle. Hence we draw hard lines in the sand, knowing full well that we don't live in a perfect society. All laws are prone to this kind of thing so some degree or another. If someone reaches over the fence into your back yard, picks up a dead leaf and puts it onto their compost heap...is that "theft"? Technically - yes, it is - that's ridiculous, but we have a 'bright line' law here. Some laws are gradual - speeding tickets in some parts of Texas are fined at such-and-such per mile-per-hour over the limit. If you are ticketted for going one mile-per-hour over the limit, the fine is completely trivial. If you are this guy...not so trivial! However, both could get reported to your insurance company - and the consequences to the cost of insuring your car are likely to be the same! SteveBaker (talk) 13:01, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Impossible fire
In the town of Centralia, Pennsylvania, the coal seam under the town has been on fire for 47 years. I understand where the fire gets its fuel, but what about its oxygen? Shouldn't it have burnt itself out by now, especially since it's underground? (sorry for asking so many questions)Library Seraph (talk) 23:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Concerning an underground coal fire, the remoter it is the slower it loses heat so the smaller the rate of oxygen inflow it needs to burn the slower and so to last the longer burning the available coal. A perfectly thermally isolated "fire" would in theory need no oxygen and never cool down. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 07:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So in short it's burning very slowly? And that's how it's able to persist after 47 years. That's something. Vaguely like the oil leaks at the site of the Arizona, which had so much oil and the holes are so small that oil is still bubbling up, 68 years after Pearl Harbor. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots20:22, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
haven holidays
when i went to haven holidays wen i was 18 i didnt have no i.d. with me, they got my mom to signe a pass as a form of i.d so i could get served at the bars in there to get alchohol, do they still do this now? as still dont have any i.d —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.47.47.172 (talk) 23:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well how old are you now? If it was recently, it is likely they will still have the same procedure in place. If it was a while ago, you should look old enough that ID will not be needed for drinking alcohol. You can ask Haven directly using this form. They will get back to you by phone or email within 24hrs. Rockpocket01:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has apparently not changed name since its founding in 1988. Synonyms and near synonyms are not uncommon in English and not necessarily an indication of any kind of terminology flip-flopping, though there may be some disagreement between different groups over which term is best.
Comment moved so as not to appear in the middle of mine. AlmostReadytoFly (talk)
They aren't "either/or" terms - they are different things. In principle, warming of the world might or might not cause the climate to change. After all, if the only thing that happened was that the temperature went up by a few degrees, most people wouldn't even notice. "CO2 pollution" causes "the greenhouse effect" - which starts "global warming" - which causes "climate change" and "sea level rise". They are each separate phenomena that happen to be linked by an interconnected chain of events. In fact, "sea level rise" also causes "global warming" because light colored beach sand becomes covered with darker colored water which absorbs more sunlight. The feedback of one phenomenon into the other is the kind of thing that makes it hard to predict what's going to happen (in detail, at least). At the level of the science, the terms are quite distinct and have subtle and important meaning. At the level of politics and public debate, we can simplify and use the terms more or less interchangeably even though that's not quite correct. SteveBaker (talk) 12:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The IPCC's "tasked to evaluate the risk of climate change caused by human activity". All current research points to current human activity giving rise to a specific form of climate change being the most likely and therefore of greatest concern and that is global warming. The terms don't change, it's just that they mean different things. BTW this was discussed a few months okay on the science desk Nil Einne (talk) 06:36, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh those crazy [Vaguely defined Political group] and their double-talk nonsense. Watch me cleverly skewer them by pointing out that sometimes they describe the same thing with different words! No one will ever vote for [them] again, now that I have brilliantly pointed out their lack of a strict, rigidly defined, one-to-one correspondence of thoughts to nomenclature. Vote Robot Party in 2012! 72.10.110.109 (talk) 14:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
how many cities around the world have regular 24 hour public transport? I cant find a list anywhere.
also, whilst most major cities do have this why doesnt Tokyo?is it that late night taxis are controlled by the mob and want more business? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.202.43.53 (talk) 05:36, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea how many cities do, or what counts as "major" to you, but I can assert that Seattle (certainly one of the U.S.'s larger cities, though not top 10) doesn't, and as I recall Vancouver, B.C. (one of Canada's larger cities...I'd guess top 10) doesn't either. Tokyo, of course, is in a different class of city than these, but I thought I'd point out that the number of cities (at least in North America) with 24 hours public transport must not be very large, if my sample is at all representative. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 06:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In general 24-hour public transport = night buses. Most subway and overground trains can't run all through the night because they need to carry out maintenance at night. The only exception is the New York City Subway. Many large cities run night buses, but I can't find a list of them. We have an article on night buses but it's not very helpful. --Richardrjtalk email07:33, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The PATH train between New York and New Jersey also runs 24 hours. I think I read somewhere that about 4 to 7 cities in the US (counting PATH as separate from NY) have 24-hour light rail/subway service. Jørgen (talk) 19:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vienna (Austria, pop. 2 mio) and a number of other European cities have a night bus service, which kicks off when the trams, normal busses and subway / underground / tube close. In Vienna, there are about 25 lines with a frequency of 2 per hour. There is also a collective cab system for low density routes (fixed times / fixed pick up points) which is subsidised. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 07:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Berlin S-Bahn runs all night in the weekends. As for night bus service, I agree that most big cities should be expected to have them (though the public transport-intensive Oslo, for example, only has service on weekends). Jørgen (talk) 19:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If honest politicians are as rare as is so widely claimed, then why do the media consider all acts of political dishonesty to be newsworthy? Wouldn't the real news then be the rare act of honesty in the face of temptation? NeonMerlin06:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The real rarity is politically neutral media. Every journalist would like to be the one that gets a Pulitzer Prize for exposing a juicy ( = sells newspapers and gets a promotion) scandal. It does happen that an editorial extolls the noble achievements of a statesman but usually after he's dead. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 06:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Plus, the media are not generally interested in good news stories, they only want to report scandal and negative events. An act of honesty is not newsworthy, whereas an act of dishonesty is. --Richardrjtalk email07:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many politicians would be 'honest' most of the time, some virtually all the time. It depends to a degree on what you mean by honest and how far you want to take it, but there would certainly be many politicians who would not actually be corrupt (admittedly I do come from a country with a relatively uncorrupted system, I know many others are far worse). But is these politicians doing the right thing news? It's kind of the thing that you can't prove a negative - as long as a politician is being honest it's not news (what could you report anyway, "Senator xxxx continues to stick to his word...", who wants to read that everyday?) and it may be hard to prove anyway, but if they do something dishonest then it does become news. And you can hardly report about how honest a politician is when at any time they may prove to be dishonest - you really have to wait till the end of their career, and that's not happening all the time. However if they do something wrong you can instantly report on that. A lot of the dishonesty that is reported is really pretty trivial when you look at it anyway (again from my local POV), often it's simply journos looking for a story. --jjron (talk) 08:09, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Simply - honest politicians are not rare at all. The problem with 'honesty' is that the media can be a bit black and white. They often seem to see any change of stance, any change to a previously agreed/proposed plan as proof of dishonesty - when a lot of the time it is simply that things change. The public's perception of politicians seems to be that they are dishonest, so all these sorts of things are pushed as acts of dishonesty and corruption, when a logical and sensible reason may well exist. The beauty (and major problem) of journalism is that you can write a story in such a way that the readership fills in the blanks. Basically though, there are 100s of politicians in pretty much every country (mine being the Uk) and my perspective says that the vast majority will be largely honest - or at least no more dishonest than the average person. As I said I believe the problem is that when people see the claim "we will reduce tax by 10%" and then when it doesn't transpire they call it lies - when the reality may be that they wanted to do it, but ultimately something prevented them (I appreciate this perspective appears to be rare in view of politicians). As others said there's no sales to be made in headlines such as "Politician meets their committment" (in the national media at least - local media appears to be more positive). 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Define 'honest'. On the pure criterion nobody is totally honest. Politicians tend towards the need to guard the truth sometimes (ahead of a currency revaluation, for example). Their worst tendency, however, is to work only in the short-term..i.e. In our village, the church roof needed repair. Instead of replacing tiles and timbers (as recommended) the mayor replaced tiles only. Thus one of his successors, in only 5 years or so, will have to fund another roof stripping. Think for the moment only. This distinguishes the politician from the statesman. But there are not many statesmen!86.219.160.171 (talk)DT —Preceding undated comment added 14:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]
You mean your village council takes responsibility for the church? That seems odd, especially since your IP address indicates you're in France, a country known for its state secularism. NeonMerlin04:01, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Napoleon was responsible for one heck of a lot. Including the abolition of the RC church in France and the confiscation of its property. The church became legal later (1842 I think) but the property was never restored. So the French State owns the churches. And is responsible for their upkeep. The Church have to furnish, etc. of course. So, yes, our village taxes went up for two years to pay for the repairs. And, yes, I do live in a lovely French fishig village. Some people have all the luck!86.197.148.121 (talk) 13:05, 27 August 2009 (UTC)DT[reply]
Image recollection question
Why is it, that when you see pictures of something you particularly enjoy seeing - in this particular case, scantily clad women - you enjoy it much more when you saw it yourself in the flesh, particularly when you took the pictures yourself, even though the end result is the same: the actual event, as is happened, is gone, and only the pictures remain? As a personal example, I have nowhere near a photographic memory. I can easily remember that I saw something - for years, if not decades - but what it looked like is gone within days, if it's not a repeated occasion. Pictures of the event make me remember exactly what it looked like, but they're not any better than anyone else's pictures of the same event, in fact, they're worse, as I'm not a professional photographer. But seeing someone else's photographs of such an event makes me anxious and envious thinking "damn, I should have been there", but seeing my own photographs simply makes me think "oh yes, that was nice to see", even though the photographs are the only actual recollection I have of the event. Can anyone provide an explanation for this? JIP | Talk20:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You might be interested in our article Explicit memory - the section on 'encoding and retrieval' seems to offer a little around the way that the 'photograph' acts as a cue to aid recollection. I would also add the note that our brains are particularly good at filling in the blanks with gay abandon for the 'truth'. This is touched on in the article Eyewitness testimony and the linked article Confabulation. ny156uk (talk) 21:02, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It seems fairly obvious: the anxiety and jealousy comes from the things not shown in the photograph which you didn't have the opportunity to see or do. For instance, substitute "scantily clad woman" with "ancient megalithic structure", something I think you'll agree is also nice to see. If you were actually there you can perform a thorough investigation of the site and look at it from all angles, and generally satisfy your curiosity. Therefore when you see a picture of the megaliths at a later date you have less cause for anxiety, since you remember all about it at least on a factual level, and don't feel that you are missing out. 213.122.14.76 (talk) 21:50, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Human memory is not like computer memory—it's not just raw visual data that is being stored, it is also a whole host of emotions, physical states, smells, etc. All sorts of things can trigger those and get very strong reactions. You can even fake memories if you are clever about it, and build up the right responses (see false memories). Every memory is a little network of sensations that get triggered. When you go back to a strong memory, it is like tripping a switch and having a cascade of little unconscious memories set off. --68.50.54.144 (talk) 04:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Who is that woman?
In a number of places where I've worked, there's a sign in the the staff kitchen/tea room, written in spookily similar terms. It usually goes something like this:
Please wash your own coffee mugs, plates, utensils etc and leave the kitchen clean and tidy. It's unfair on other staff to expect them to clean up after you. You wouldn't do this in your own home, so don't do it here.
I've always wondered, who is this person (sounds like a mother - no offence) who keeps following me around and having a parallel career path? How does she know what the state of our private pigsties are like? Does she pop up in other countries?
That reminds me of the countless number of times I've seen a sign saying "your mother doesn't work here, so clean up after yourself". Well, my mother doesn't work in my own workplace, or in my father's workplace, but she does work in her own worplace, and I've visited it many times, roughly once or twice per year, since my early childhood. JIP | Talk20:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think assuming it's a woman is a bit strange. I used to work with the most anal retentive person I've ever met and it was a guy, married with kids. And he was the source of most of the "notes" around the office. To annoy him, I kid you not, when he'd leave his desk we would move one of his highlighters from its "spot" in front of his monitor to just beside it and he would be beside himself until he worked out what was out of place and put it back. Back to the "note" thing, I think it's getting worse, right now I work in an office which even has illustrated instructions of how to use the male toilets. I mean, I don't know what's worse, the fact the instructions are there, or the fact that someone had a reason to think they need to be there. I'm in Australia, by the way. Vespine (talk) 22:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Jack, this is not confined to Australia. In my office, there is often a note left by an employee in the company kitchenette that reads something like "Your mother doesn't work here, so clean up after yourself." (I say "often", because periodically it is removed. It is then—maybe a few days later—replaced with another.) I don't know whether a man or woman posts this note. I'm in the United States, by the way. Marco polo (talk) 22:59, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No no, i mentioned I'm from australia to demonstrate this wasn't confined to the states, not to imply it was just an australian thing...Vespine (talk) 00:26, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vespine, I share your concern that a sign telling males how to use the toilet should be necessary. But apparently it is. In one of my earlier workplaces, we were confronted one day with the sight (and smell) of a faeces-loaded toilet seat. Only the staff had access to the office, so outsiders were ruled out. There were a couple of new workers who were from other countries where Western toilets are the exception rather than the rule, and it was assumed that one of them had no idea what to do, so he stood on it rather than sit on it, aimed rather poorly, and chose to do nothing about his ... droppings. I kid you not. We hoped we weren't being unfair to our foreign cousins, but no other reasonable explanation presented itself. The culprit was never identified afaik. Whoever it was, anal retention was apparently the least of his problems. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:26, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
oh yeah look, I totally understand the reason, it is the same where I work there are many people who are more accustomed to squat toilets, but make it part of "induction" or something. I just find it a bit frustrating, it's like all the signs that say "do not jump off the pier", purely because of a few cases where idiots broke their necks and sued the council?! I mean come on. It has become our social responsibility to pre-empt every human idiocy. Vespine (talk) 00:26, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At school, in my days of youthful frivolity, we put up a sign which said, "flush twice, it's a long way to the cafeteria." We put that sign up in a restroom. As happens so often with such signs, someone else removed it. (This may be a little off topic.) Bus stop (talk) 12:52, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This woman can get quite sarcastic. A sign in my office (workplace) kitchen a few years ago - "Milk, like revenge, is best served cold. Put milk back in the fridge after use". 80.193.130.5 (talk) 08:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW: We have a big shared kitchen at work - and there are occasional problems (particularly with people not turning on - and subsequently not emptying - the dishwasher). We approach it with humor - and it seems to work. I drew up a ridiculously complicated flow chart for how to use the dishwasher with things like "Do you see your mother nearby?"...if yes..."Feel free to leave your coffee mug on the counter top and she'll deal with it"...if no..."Yell 'MOMMY, MOMMY, HELP ME NOW'"...with subsequent instructions on what to do if she doesn't show up. It covers about four sheets of paper. We also have two very complicated Italian-made coffeemakers - the kind with lots of levers and dials and chrome pipework. A nice photograph of a flash-flood washing away a bridge is accompanied by "List of ways to flood the kitchen with an Italian coffee-maker that is the approximate cost and complexity of a Ferrari F430". SteveBaker (talk) 12:40, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I don't mind a gentle reminder; a humorous one is even better. But this "You expected me to clean up your mess and I was forced to comply and I resent having to do that" sort of message can go to hell. 213.122.14.76's passive-aggressive notes covers it well, I think. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:27, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Warning: anecdotal evidence on my part: I had always heard that, at least here in Ireland, it was originally so that the children/young adults were free to help with agricultural work during the summer. That could be total BS, but it could make sense in that around the time compulsory education was introduced, farming families might have been reluctant to lose part of what was then very much a family business, for the entirety of the year. Fribbler (talk) 23:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think there was some truth to that originally. In recent years (i.e. since the 70s) the story in the US at least is that schools extended vacation, especially the winter one, in order to cut down on heating costs (and cooling in the summer months) due to the high prices of oil at that time. It's not unreasonable - I know my small college of about 2400 students spent roughly $1 million a month on energy for all of the campus buildings, so keeping students out as much as possible cuts down on that. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs)00:55, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If that were true one would expect northern states to have long winter breaks (to save on heating) and southern ones to have long summer breaks (to save on aircon). Is that the case? --Tango (talk) 01:04, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
People go to school in the American south?!? No, I don't think that's the case, but I think that iss more due to the bureaucracy of the system than anything else - If schools in the North are getting paid 50k a year to have students in school for six months while schools in the South are charging the same for 8-10 months, well then the South is gonna change real fast. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs)02:02, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was describing a system where different schools have the same amount of term time, just at different times of the year. There is no need for heating in Florida during the winter - I know because I spent last new year there and it was anything but cold - there is, however, need for lots of aircon in the summer. Vice versa in northern states. --Tango (talk) 02:27, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The reason is probably that everyone knows that much of what passes for formal education is unimportant and that taking a vacation is arguably just as important. Bus stop (talk) 07:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Homework and the marking it entails means my mother is constantly complaining about the fact that she works more hours than me, even including holidays. The small hours are, she says, an illusion. Vimescarrot (talk) 10:31, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While this isn't true of all schools, many now offer courses year-round, where the academic calendar is divided into three terms. For the courses to fit, the year gets divided into three equal four-month chunks — a long summer session is thus required.
In jurisdictions where universities aren't fully funded by the government, a longer summer break allows students to find full-time employment to offset some of the debt load they might otherwise incur. (In some fields, this time might be occupied by volunteer projects or internships to build experience instead.) It takes a certain amount of time to get any new employee or intern up to speed, and a short break wouldn't make hiring a student worthwhile.
Even though the undergraduates are gone for the summer, the professors, postdocs, and graduate students are usually still on campus, working away on their projects. They can get a lot of stuff done when there aren't undergrads underfoot, and they're not distracted by marking and teaching. It's important to remember that 'undergrads aren't in class' isn't directly equivalent to 'everyone is on holiday'. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 12:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Those are all great points, and some schools even do quarters. It gives students more flexibility in their lives, the speed at which they want to take courses and graduate. And as you said, a lot of work is done on the "off period," mainly by the professors, who need to "publish or perish." 40% of their time during the year doesn't always add up to much, and that's assuming they can even make the 40-mark. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs)13:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In America, most public schools operate on a 180-day calendar; and most schools distrubute those 180 days in a "traditional" school calendar featuring the standard long 9-week summer break. However, in my county in North Carolina, lots of schools have converted to a Year-round calendar featuring a "9-week-on, 3-week-off" 4-track rotating schedule (each school has 4 tracks, and at any one 3-week period, one of the tracks is "off"). This schedule still uses 180 days, but no break is longer than 3-weeks, with the exception of an extra week at christmas and mid-summer, and sporadic holidays throughout the year, when all tracks are out. Though there are educational advantages of this calendar (such as not having a long break to forget stuff), but the real reason is space problems; year-round schools can hold 25% more students (since the building never goes unused), and the huge growth in my county has outstripped the county's ability to build schools. --Jayron3203:16, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
August 27
can water go instantly from boiling to frozen in cold climates
I heard that in very cold places you can throw a cup of boiling water in the air and it would freeze by the time it hits the ground.
is this true or an urban myth? is there a site that shows this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.202.43.53 (talk) 06:37, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, fairly impressive. In both cases significant quantities of water fall to the ground. Obviously it would freeze if these guys had been able to throw it may be twice as high. I go with Bus Stop. 86.4.181.14 (talk) 07:34, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Finding what physical process allows the fast freezing seems to be in the realm of OR but it cannot be literally instant because there must be a finite time for the latent heat of fusion to flow from the liquid water to the air. A note in the above article that may be relevant is that liquid water being cooled quickly can rebound from just below the freezing point 0°C before the freezing process. The effect is unexplained but presumably has a time delay. It may allow relatively deeper penetration of "prefrozen ice" into the liquid when the temperature gradient is high. That is just my OR and only one of the hypotheses for the Mpemba effect.Cuddlyable3 (talk) 08:12, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think it depends more on how you throw it (although height will obviously make a difference too). The thermal conductivity of water is really the limiting factor here. If you were to spray the hot water as a fine mist, I'm pretty sure nobody would find it surprising that it fell to the ground as tiny ice particles. On the other hand, if you dropped a cubic meter of water contained (perhaps in a thin balloon) as a solid 'blob' - even from thousands of feet up - then nobody would be surprised if it didn't freeze solid because there isn't enough time for the heat to be conducted out of the water to the surface. Ice is actually a pretty decent thermal insulator (that's why you can be warm inside an igloo!) Somewhere between those two extremes, the droplets would be small enough and sufficiently widely separated to properly freeze. The other problem is that the hot water is also warming up the air.
That's going to insulate the water from further cold to some degree - so, again, the water droplets have to be separated by enough air such that the air itself has sufficient thermal capacity to absorb all of the heat from the water without getting above zero degrees C and stopping the freezing process. SteveBaker (talk) 12:29, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Small correction: igloos are not made from solid ice, but from snow, which amounts to a mixture of ice and air. The many ice/air boundaries inside the snow must contribute to the insulating power. Of course buildings made of ice exist as well. --Anonymous, 16:20 UTC, August 27, 2009.
If you get the droplets small enough, a significant portion of the water will evaporate, taking heat with it and making the droplets even smaller. This is similar to the trick of putting out a saucer of near-boiling water and a saucer of room temperature water and seeing which freezes first.
P.S. I'm sure I've seen this trick done on an episode of Nova about the research station on the South Pole. IIRC the guy doing it wasn't even wearing outdoors clothes. APL (talk) 14:24, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Water vapor freezes out of the air all the time without going through an intevening liquid phase, the process is called Deposition and it is the functional reverse of sublimation. That having been said, I am not sure how the process would apply to steam at 100 degrees celsius cooling to ice crystals without forming intervening water droplets; what likely happens is there is a very brief period of condensation whereby tiny liquid water droplets form, these then freeze before they have time to make large enough droplets to see. This is different from actual deposition, which involves sub-0 degree water vapor in the air directly forming solid ice. --Jayron3203:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
UK Railways
What is the longest stretch of railway in the UK between two stations ?
In the U.S., railroads have official timetables for conductors, with detailed distances. You may be able to find something similar in the U.K. --- OtherDave (talk) 19:18, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to Google, some guy called Curtis Rivers jumped from a balloon 15,200 ft above Puertollano in Spain to set a new record. He also made a parachute jump from 25,000 feet lasting 45 minutes. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 14:16, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Have you got a reliable source for that? I would have thought a jump from 25,000 feet would have lasted around 140 seconds. To fall for 45 minutes, he would have to jump from much higher up. Astronaut (talk) 14:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Parachuting#Parachute deployment suggests the parachute slows the speed of descent to 12 mph. Even if the chute was deployed immediately, the 25,000 feet descent would only take about 23 minutes. Maybe he jumped from 25,000 metres, but without a reliable source it is hard to be sure. Astronaut (talk) 15:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Special Forces troops can drift for hours on end. They are trained to do this so they can infiltrate enemy territory covertly without the noise of the plane giving them away. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 18:54, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, should have made myself more clear... The 'deepest' place to bungee jump from (that's available for public) as opposed to record length... Thanks 81.33.81.250 (talk) 16:52, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think 'deepest place to bungee jump to' would be more appropriate. The deepest place to jump from would be the ocean floor, and would not be much fun. Save money on bungee cord, though. --58.38.163.187 (talk) 20:57, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure whether you could actually do this 'on camera', but you can produce this effect using a Radial Blur filter in Photoshop (took me about a minute to reproduce). Not that I've tried this myself, but if you read the bottom paragraph in this section (or check Zoom burst), using a zoom while the shutter is open will produce a radial blur which would be similar - however you'd probably need a longer exposure than would be possible in the linked image, and the blur is off centre in it (which could have resulted from a crop). However, on the balance I'd say it's been Photoshopped. --jjron (talk) 15:24, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a photographer, off the top of my head, I can think of 3 ways to produce a picture like that: 1) As AlmostReadytoFly has shown, to use a slightly longer shutter speed and zoom with the lens while the shutter is open. 2) To use the Radial Blue Filter in Photoshop as Jjron has described. 3) To use a specialty lens such as a LensBaby that allows selective focus http://www.lensbaby.com/. Acceptable (talk) 15:35, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The link I provided very clearly indicates that this is possible in camera, and provides a nice discussion of exactly how to do so, along with several nice examples. --LarryMac | Talk17:16, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst I can't give you a specific example (I have no acquaintance with one), I am almost certain the answer is yes. My reason is simply that the world's population is so vast and the occurrence doesn't sound too unlikely.--Leon (talk) 16:37, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Logics suggest the following simplification:
Some (possibly most) men (man A) are already married to the mother of their son (man B). This leaves the requirement of the said son B to marry his paternal grandmother.
Google suggest there are / were at least two cases of a man marrying his grandmother (in India and Russia), though none states if this is the grandmother on the paternal or maternal side.
Only in the vaguest possible sense, though. It certainly wasn't legally incestuous, otherwise they would never have been permitted to marry. Allen and Farrow never married, and never even lived together. Soon-Yi was simply his girlfriend's adopted daughter (never his step-daughter), who later became his wife. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:18, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What went on between Allen and Soon-Yi while Allen was in a relationship with Farrow was certainly sleazy. He was sort of in loco parentis to Soon-Yi at that stage - but only sort of - and to that degree he had a duty of care to treat her accordingly. The judge was scathing about his behaviour in relation to her at that time. But she agreed to become his wife regardless of all that; her decision should be respected, imo. It's understandable why Farrow is all bitter and twisted about Allen nowadays, but it's still the choice of two adults to marry - or not - whatever their parents think of it. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:58, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's true, and Farrow was not exactly a paragon of virtue herself. In any case, since she wasn't his step-anything, "wife" is sufficient to cover it. Also technically a little far afield from the original question. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots12:17, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's close, but not exactly the same. My mom had two brothers who married a mother and daughter. We sometimes jokingly call the daughter my "cousin-aunt". She was my step-cousin for several years before she became my aunt, and I knew her more that way, but lots of my younger cousins only know her as their aunt. STrange things happen in large families... --Jayron3203:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Box-shaped slatted covers on British traffic lights
Does anyone know why on some light units on British traffic lights a box-shaped cover with slats is sometimes placed on it? I don't think it's permenent, but I'm not sure... Chevymontecarlo (talk) 17:06, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's more to do with reducing the angle over which the light is visible - either to stop drivers at other junctions using the light to predict what will happen with their light, or to avoid annoying nearby residents. Not certain, though. --Phil Holmes (talk) 17:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I find those boxes rather annoying, as a pedestrian, because I never know when the lights have changed and when to cross - sometimes you don't have the little green man on the other side. Very dangerous. --58.38.163.187 (talk) 21:08, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm with Phil. You only see these slats when there are two junctions close together. The slats block the light except in a slightly downwards direction, so that you can only see it when you're within that arc. This stops someone waiting at junction A seeing a light change to green at junction B, thinking it's for him, and driving out in front of a lorry. 93.97.184.230 (talk) 17:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
More. (continues from above discussion) this [20] says the purpose of slats (louvres) is to prevent the wrong lane of traffic reading the light - however I infer that such louvres would need to be vertically aligned to work.
Horizontal louvres cannot prevent that effect - but do stop the sun - also consider the lorry driver - who is at least 1m higher than the average car driver. Question did you mean horizontal or vertical louvres?83.100.250.79 (talk) 19:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They are horizontal, but contained in a box (or, if you like having single vertical slats at each side, and top & bottom). They are, imo, a bit crap for exactly the reason hinted at by 83.100 - won't you consider the lorry driver? --Tagishsimon(talk)19:52, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are some of these at a junction in Brighton which are so arranged that the only way to see what the lights are actually shewing is to drive over the stop line - it's fine if you can remember the sequence of all the other lights at the junction, but it can be a bit hairy. DuncanHill (talk) 10:14, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a driving instructor I can confirm that according to whichever manual I read it in while training that it is as mentioned repeatedly above - ie it is done to prevent all but the specifically intended traffic to be able to view the green light. A case in point - there is a large traffic junction near me that also has a light controlled pedestrian crossing within 5 metres of the green light for the major junction. In order for the oncoming vehicles to not go on the wrong green light (and the crossing light is always green - no-one uses it as they just go when the major junction has stopped!) there are slats in place that you are thus only able to see the green light of the crossing when you are within the 5 metre area between the edge of the major junction and the crossing. Having said that I am bloody glad no-one uses the crossing as i don't know many people who would be able to stop that quickly if they even actually noticed it wasn't green! not at the speed most poeple leave this particular junction anyways... Hope that that helps... Gazhiley (talk) 10:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Objectives
plz guide me about the diffrence between verifiable and non verifiable objectives of a organisation.it is qustion from management area.is goodwill comes under verifiable objective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nutanswami (talk • contribs) 17:33, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The question "Is 'goodwill' a verifiable objective" can be answered. Some companies have have "corporate statement" that sets out their objectives in terms of the world outside their line of business - such statements commonly included: environmental policy, human rights policy, fair trade policy e.t.c. ; in general the key values that the company wants to be associated with. If a company wants to cultivate goodwill it will probably say in the corporate statement.
For example Sharp has a guiding principle of "Honesty and Creativity" described in it's corporate profile [21]
For more examples see http://www.sharp-world.com/corporate/info/index.html - most large companies will have a similar page outlining various company policies relating to social responsibility, customer relations etc.
But you're only discussing goodwill as being an objective. As to whether that objective is verifiable, as in "did we meet our goal?", I'd be thinking no. To be verifiable, you need to measure it. How do you measure "good will"? Contrast, say, to "our objective is to reduce electricity use by 25% over the next two years".
I assumed it meant whether or not to achieve goodwill is verifiable as an objective of the company, rather than whether or not that objective could have been met (or be shown to have been met)..It doesn't need measurement - just a statement on the company website saying "we seek to build goodwill with all our customers"... Perhaps the accounting meaning is more likely anyway83.100.250.79 (talk) 21:03, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the test to to find out whether or not "goowill" has been achieved as an aim - ie is "goodwill" a verifiable aim then the answer is yes, but with reservations - A customer survey would probably help in this case.
Why do bruises tend to get darker and darker over time before they gradually fade away? I have a huge bruise on my arm from a fall two weeks ago, and at the time it happened it was just a darkish yellowy colour. Now it's dark purple. (NB: not a request for medical advice, just a query). --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 19:21, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Same thing happened to me last week. I had a couple of bee stings, and for the first week they were light red. Then they turned purple for a couple of days, then disappeared. — Michael J19:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This site contains a colour chart explaining how the coloration of a bruise over time is related to the chemical changes taking place in the haemoglobin as it breaks down. Karenjc20:58, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tourist Visa in China
Is it possible to go to China on a tourist visa to find work? Ok, this is a legal question, so feel free not to answer it, but I have been told that that is the most common way to do it. Then what happens? Do you exit the country after your 30 days are up, and return with a work permit from the company you have signed up with, or can you just apply for a 'Change Of Status', as you can in Japan? --58.38.163.187 (talk) 21:04, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
China is still a communist country, even tho it has made great economic and free trade progress, it can still be very idiosyncratic, not least due to the diplomatic corruption. Japan on the other hand may as well be a western country as far as diplomacy goes, I was there for a month and didn't need a visa. Give the Chinese consulate a call and just ask them, it is one of the reasons they are there. I had to apply for a visa to Vietnam a few years ago and the process was fairly easy, in fact most of the people I dealt with were very friendly and happy to help. The only major pain was I actually had to post my passport to the Vietnamese consulate which was interstate and it took about six weeks to get it back. It was registered post and everything, but I still got a funny feeling putting my passport in the post. Vespine (talk) 00:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anecdotally, it's possible to go to China on a tourist visa and then apply for a work visa when you have work. The process takes some time to do, up to and more than a month, in some cases, because of the paperwork, but I've also seen it done in a week in... uhh... special circumstances. While working on a tourist visa is illegal, it is still a common occurrence, and some companies have been known to delay the work visa so that they can fly under the radar for longer. Be careful, and be savvy, but it's both possible and not entirely uncommon. You'll need someone in the know to help you through the paperwork. Steewi (talk) 01:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to [22], "Most breeders recommend a high-quality dry food, and most cats can eat when they like without becoming overweight." Nimur (talk) 01:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Siamese cats are mostly so spoiled they eat whatever they damn want. The most interesting thing about them are that many are afflicted with optic chiasm. Their optic nerves are tangled wrong, and they compensate by crossing their eyes, or sometimes just by walking into things. PhGustaf (talk) 01:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When I go to websites to see foreign exchange rates, they are always better than actual banks will really give you. I have to look at websites of each individual bank to see what their actual exchange rate is.
Now I will be in Tokyo next month and I need to know some actual Japanese banks and their actual exchange rates. Can anyone help please with real links or sites? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.202.43.54 (talk) 01:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a website showing current exchange rates at banks at Tokyo's Narita Airport. You will see that the "sell" price is different from the "buy" price. Somewhere between these prices is the exchange rate you will find quoted on many foreign exchange websites. The number quoted on these websites is the spot rate, which is available only to registered traders trading millions of dollars (or their equivalent) at a time. Ordinary travelers do not have access to high-volume currency exchanges. Banks and bureaux de change such as the one linked above offer travelers indirect access to currency exchanges for a fee, either implicit or explicit. That fee is the difference between the rate offered by the bank (or bureau de change) and the market rate you will see quoted on foreign exchange websites. Some banks and bureaux de change charge an explicit percentage or flat per-transaction fee in addition to the implicit fee carried by their exchange rates. If you are traveling, it can pay to use intermediaries offering the best (i.e. closest to market) exchange rates and lowest (preferably zero) explicit fees. In my somewhat extensive experience as a traveler, I have found that I get the best exchange rate by using my ATM card to withdraw cash from foreign ATMs. However, I have chosen to use a card issued by a bank in my home country that does not charge per-transaction fees for the use of foreign ATMs. If your bank does charge these fees, then you may be better off taking traveler's checks with you, but you should look around a bit in Tokyo or consult a travel guide to find a bank or bureau de change with a reasonable rate and low to nonexistent fees. Marco polo (talk) 02:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
God
What's the name source of the philosophy (maybe it's a particular quote) that the purpose of God is to watch? Sort of a silent witness type that observes everything. I've seen that theme come up in some literature and I'm sure they're borrowing it from somewhere, but I can't remember where. I don't mean mere Deism; I think it's more of a sarcastic humanistic "If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him" sort of thing, mixed with recognition of the genuine human need to be understood. Thanks .froth. (talk) 03:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Kurt Vonnegut invented such a religion, IIRC, which basically stated that God created the universe and then stopped intervening in it entirely. It was not Bokononism, but a different religion, something along the lines of "God-the-indifferent" or some such. I forget which story it was from, perhaps an early one like Player Piano or Sirens of Titan or something. --Jayron3204:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum. It was Sirens of Titan. He calls it "Church of God the Utterly Indifferent". As to a more formal real-world philosophy that this is based on, I am not certain. --Jayron3204:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah just the spark I needed. A long long stretch for the RD to recognize, but it's called "The Church of the God Who Makes No Difference" from Permutation City. Basically, God's function is to observe, because anything that observes is a God. Thanks! .froth. (talk) 04:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A parallel idea, I think (not knowing the science-fiction stories), might be the 17th and 18th-century rationalist notion that perhaps The Creator (seen as The Great Architect of the Universe) might have designed and built the Universe and set it in motion like The Watchmaker in the Watchmaker Analogy, but having given Free Will to at least one of His Creations, would have had to give free will meaning by abstaining from further intervention in the world's affairs. But the Creator would still be omniscient. —— Shakescene (talk) 04:55, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the case of Jaycee Lee Dugard, the article mentions that her stepfather witnessed her abduction (and was initially a suspect). But the article says nothing about her birth parents. Who are they, and what are they saying now? --Richardrjtalk email07:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I recently sent some panoramic photos (I added black areas to the top and bottom to make them fit a 40x60 poster - I then planned to cut off the black areas and mount them on the wall) to be developed by my local photo shop. When they came back, they looked considerably more washed out (brighter, with maybe a bit less contrast) than how they had looked on my computer monitor, which was disappointing. My question: how do I control what the final print looks like? I can make the image darker and send it to be printed again, but that's little better than trial and error. Is there a way to simulate what a given image would look like when printed? Do I perhaps need to adjust my monitor settings? Thanks! — QuantumEleven09:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think properly adjusting your monitor settings should definitely be your first step! See color calibration. To really do it properly, you need a tristimulus colorimeter, but that may be overkill for your needs, honestly. Just using the calibration software that comes with Windows, for example, can result in drastically improved picture quality. Also, you don't mention how old your monitor is, but especially if you have an older CRT monitor, it's very likely that the picture just isn't as bright as it used to be, which obviously makes washed out areas appear to be much darker. I've run into this myself, with somewhat unfortunate results when areas I thought to be solid black in a picture really weren't. Buying a new monitor really made a difference there. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 10:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like some sort of auto-correction was done on your image without a real live person ever actually looking at your photo to see if that makes sense. The computerized enlarger could have looked at the black bars around your image and decided that the picture on average was too dark and then lightened it for you.
If you find a photo developer where you can actually talk to the people who will be doing the work, you can explain to them this issue and they'll be able to adjust the image manually APL (talk) 12:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alternatively you could put 5 bars of color (printer's cyan, magenta, yellow, gray 50% and white) on the black part you wish to have cut off. (See if your printer came with a color test sheet or see if you can pick up a pantone scale somewhere or find a color bar margin in a used magazine.) If all else fails pick up a couple of those "color sample" leaflets at the paint mixing station at a local home improvement store. Cut out some swatches, match that to what you have on those color bars and then hand all that in to the printers' together with your image file. That way you can check your image when you pick it up at the store and throw it back at them for a do-over when you're not happy. (Before you pay. :-) 71.236.26.74 (talk) 23:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Long Road Trip
If one was traveling from Manhattan, NY to Fairbanks, AK by car, what would be the ideal car to use, the most important, needed travel items and, if obeying all traffic laws, how much time should one allow oneself to travel there and back? --Reticuli88 (talk) 13:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No idea specifics of journey as I'm in UK, but surely any car is fine as long as it is in sound mechanical condition? The more comfortable the car the better I would assume, and things like air con, decent stereo etc will make the journey more enjoyable... But a car's a car when ur talking about the abilty of going from a->b surely? Gazhiley (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
She's probably concerned about weather issues. Depending on how she goes, she could wind up crossing most of Canada. APL (talk) 16:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to drive the whole way and not take any ferries, then you'll have to take the AlCan or Alaska Highway. There's some information about the road here. You'd want a car that's sturdy, and your dates of travel should be planned for June through August. A quick Google Maps query shows a route that enters Canada in Manitoba, with a total distance of 4,283 miles, taking about 3 days 1 hour. Obviously, one would need extra time for meals, refueling and sleep. --LarryMac | Talk14:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AlCan is open year round - your preference for summer driving is not a requirement. Note that there are few roads in and out of Fairbanks - your options are pretty limited. You should also pay close attention to your gas tank; even along the major roads in Alaska, gasoline stations can be over a hundred miles apart. Nimur (talk) 16:00, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How many hours a day do you want to be driving? Google gives 3 days 1 hours non-stop. If you drive 8 hours a day that's a little over 9 days each way (assuming you want the fastest way, which is unlikely to be the most interesting way). Google is usually conservative so you could do it in a little less than that. As far as car to use, I'd agree it doesn't make a lot of difference as long as it's in good working condition - unless you're doing it in winter, when you'll almost certainly want something with 4 wheel drive for any icy bits. I drove from Austin, Texas to Calgary in a Jetta by going across to the coast and up, and I was pretty comfortable in it (a backseat passenger would have disagreed). As far as travel items I brought which I'm glad I did, other than an "emergency road kit" I got at Target or somewhere, I bought this little box that plugs into the cigarette lighter and provides a regular wall plug that you can plug in a laptop, charge a cell phone or use any other reasonably powered household appliance (I used it for a desk lamp when I couldn't see). Here is something similar. Also, a tape adapter is very nice, I used it to play music from my laptop (and iPod). TastyCakes (talk) 14:25, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you were to leave much later in the year than now, I would bring blankets in case you break down so that you can try to avoid hypothermia. Also obviously pack warm clothes. A flashlight is always a good idea. Personally, I would want to bring music. I would also carry some relatively nonperishable food (granola bars?) and bottles of water, again, in case of breakdown and also because distances between outposts on the Alaska Highway can be great. For the same reasons, you will need to stop for gas at points along that highway even if the tank is not close to empty, because you could run out before you get to the next outpost. If you are at all mechanically inclined, you might bring a tire jack, spare tire, and tools for quick repairs, since you could have a long wait for rescue in case of breakdown. You might want to look into what, if any, coverage AAA or CAA offer along your route. Marco polo (talk) 15:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On the same note, I've heard them say that a candle generates enough heat to stop you freezing in a car. That said, I have no idea how accurate "they" are. TastyCakes (talk) 15:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That seems unlikely; as it fails to account for even basic things like how large of a car, and how cold it is outside. I suspect it's a myth. A zero-degree sleeping bag will stave off hypothermia for a long time, though. Nimur (talk) 16:07, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is supposed to work in snow caves and igloos (so say reliable survival books I have read). Cars probably aren't that well insulated, but if you do the trip in summer it hopefully won't get too cold. A candle or two would certainly make a difference. Blankets would be required as well. --Tango (talk) 16:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A car is effectively uninsulated: both metal and glass conduct heat quite well. For comparison, six inches of packed snow provide as much insulation as typical blown fiberglass. --Carnildo (talk) 20:58, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When this question is asked, people usually recommend buying the current edition of The Milepost for advice (more reliable than "I've heard" and "It is supposed to work"). The web site for the publication is at www.milepost.com. And incidentally, it says right on the home page that any sort of car is okay. --Anonymous, 17:55 UTC, August 28, 2009.
Well, I've driven through some reasonably remote regions of Alaska in winter and in summer (so this is better than just "I've heard" or "I found on the internet")... but I'm just a random guy on the internet. If you're doing it in winter, expect delays. Consider carrying a gun (I was surprised to hear this advice but several motel owners were surprised I'd even consider being out without a pistol - I'm not usually one for arming myself on my road-trips, but when in Alaska, do as the Alaskans do... I guess). Recognize that most of the roadway is not suitable for "interstate-style" driving - it's not designed for that speed; nor that level of convenience. There will not be rest-stop, cell-phone coverage, gasoline, food, for long stretches. Plan ahead, keep a paper map, and make sure your car is in very good shape. Towtrucks aren't cheap when they have to make a hundred mile round-trip. If you find yourself50 miles from Tok and 50 miles from Big Delta, with any kind of a car problem (no matter how minor), you can find yourself in a very serious situation, and very little in the way of communications equipment. It's strange to drive on roads which do not have lights, powerlines, or any other sign of human existence - even for just a few miles. It's even stranger if you deviate at all from any of the four main roads (for this, we needed six-wheel-drive trucks). There will be stretches where you can be tens or hundreds of miles from the nearest house, (let alone the nearest town)... very surreal. Nimur (talk) 23:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wedding Objection
In a traditional (USA? Christian?) wedding ceremony, there's a point towards the end where the officiant says "If there is any reason X and Y should not be wed, speak now or forever hold your peace", or something to that effect.
Are there any well-known cases (outside soap operas) where someone has objected? Is there any procedure in the ceremony to determine whether the objection should be sustained, or the objector should be dragged out of the church? Or is that all up to the parties involved?? jeffjon (talk) 15:22, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The reason an objection is raised only in movies is because it is a rhetorical question, or perhaps incredulous is a better word to describe it. It is said to strengthen the validity of the marital union by force of non contest. DRosenbach(Talk | Contribs)15:36, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is no entirely rhetorical, but anyone with a genuine objection is likely to mention it before the ceremony states. To wait until that point would be incredibly spiteful. (Unless you were late and the ceremony started before you had a chance to say anything.) --Tango (talk) 15:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If someone in the church secretly knows or has evidence to believe that the engaged couple are actually close related (as when the bride's father is secretly the father of the groom) or that one of them is already married, then it would be better to say so and prevent the union than to wait until after the ceremony and then let it be known.It certainly should not be asked "toward the end" of the service, but before the vows are exchanged. I have not heard this question asked as part of marriage services in several religious denominations in services in the U.S., so I would be interested to know which denominations still have it as part of their wedding ritual. It is said to be part of the "traditional wedding service" dating back to the "first half of the 1300's" when no one in the world would have used or recognized those words, and when the "church" would likely have been Roman Catholic. Edison (talk) 15:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did anyone say otherwise? I was suggesting objecting before the ceremony, not after. After is a little late (although the marriage could still be annulled). --Tango (talk) 16:00, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[24] says the traditional "marriage banns" wherein the marriage was publicized in advance for a specified time had the same function of allowing anyone who knew of consanguinity or previus marriages to notify the priest so the service would be cancelled. The civil marriage service in Georgia (U.S. state)(1915) said "If there is any one who has any just and legal reason why this marriage should not be performed, speak now, or forever hold your peace." Obstacles to marriage might include: not of sound mind, male under 17 or female under 14, undissolved previous marriage, impotency, or nearness of relationship, by blood or marriage, per Section 2932 of the Civil Code of Georgia. Per [25] this code said a man could not marry his stepmother, mother-il-law, daughter-in-law, stepdaughter, or granddaughter of his wife, with similar prohibitions for women. Drunkenness at the time of marriage by contrivance to gain consent was a fraud. Marriage between white persons and persons of African consent was prohibited, so in the past that would have been something a viewer could object to. I could not find the prohibited degree of consanguinity. This does not furnish the instances you request of shouted objections during the ceremony, but it points out what some of the bases could have been. [26] says that the prohibited relation is "closer than second cousin" except for some states who allow first cousins to marry, or who allow 1st cousin marriage if both parties are elderly. Edison (talk) 16:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Has anyone actually been to a real wedding where this part of a the ceremony still happens? I always had the impression that that was phased out centuries ago except in Hollywood? APL (talk) 16:11, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(after edit conflict) I'm inclined to believe that this line of reasoning evolved from an era when all the possible objectors might have no other chance to actually be co-present with the bride, groom, and respective families (e.g. arranged marriage or geographic separation). As such, the objection really should have been raised at the first possible chance. If travel or freedom of assembly were sufficiently impaired, the first and last chance to actually raise such an objection might be the wedding. Nimur (talk) 16:12, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One objection to an Anglican wedding could be that it is before 8 am or after 6 pm, believe it or not! See [27]. A present Anglican liturgy says " If any of you can show just cause why they may not lawfully be married, speak now; or else for ever hold your peace." Another Anglican site says "First, I am required to ask anyone present who knows a reason why these persons may not lawfully marry, to declare it now."Edison (talk) 16:27, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A well-known case that isn't a soap opera? How about Jane Eyre? Chapter 26.
The service began. The explanation of the intent of matrimony was gone through; and then the clergyman came a step further forward, and, bending slightly towards Mr. Rochester, went on.
"I require and charge you both (as ye will answer at the dreadful day of judgment, when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed), that if either of you know any impediment why ye may not lawfully be joined together in matrimony, ye do now confess it; for be ye well assured that so many as are coupled together otherwise than God's Word doth allow, are not joined together by God, neither is their matrimony lawful."
He paused, as the custom is. When is the pause after that sentence ever broken by reply? Not, perhaps, once in a hundred years. And the clergyman, who had not lifted his eyes from his book, and had held his breath but for a moment, was proceeding: his hand was already stretched towards Mr. Rochester, as his lips unclosed to ask, "Wilt thou have this woman for thy wedded wife?"--when a distinct and near voice said--
"The marriage cannot go on: I declare the existence of an impediment."
Here is one vague account of an objection by an ex-boyfriend. It did not work. An uncle objected at a wedding becaue he did not like the bride's previous religion. It did not work. Consensus of websites is that the objector should have spoken to the innocent party in the wedding, or the officiant, and it is generally inappropriate to wait and make a stink during the ceremony. It smacks of the drunk ex-girlfriend who is likely to be escorted out and arrested after shouting "I'm his common-law WIFE!." [28] relates two incidents. In one the priest excorted the objector, the couple, and the parents to a private room to hear the objector's case, and called off the wedding. In the other, he heard the objection right in the wedding hall and rejected it, then had the ushers escort the objector out. If someone expects an objector, it would pay to train the ushers and to have a rent-a-cop for security and to make an arrest if necessary. Edison (talk) 16:49, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I picture the ex-girlfriend objecting because the groom is impotent. The bride yells "Not with me he ain't" and several bridesmaids and guests chime in "Not with me, neither!" and the ceremony continues, then the ex objects again because the delay has caused enough passage of time that it is past 6 pm. Edison (talk) 16:57, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I found this item interesting. It looks as though a wedding was declared invalid because (or at least partly because) the "just cause or impediment" bit had been removed from the service, and so no opportunity was given for any objection to be raised. Seems like it may still be a necessary part of proceedings, in some jurisdictions at least. Karenjc18:16, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like in that case the ex may not need to worry after the first objection if the bride didn't already know and storms out after finding the groom has been sleeping around with her friends and family (or whoever the guests and bridesmaids are). Nil Einne (talk) 19:12, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OR When I remarried 3 years ago in an English civil wedding, this declaration formed part of the ceremony. First there was a space for people to object to the wedding, then we each had to declare that we knew of no reason why we should not marry each other. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oddly enough someone actually bothered to write an instruction sheet for how to do this [29]. This quotes one judge saying it has never happened for him and he also mentions the only reason it will be stopped is if the person objection is married to one of the participants [30] which seems a bit odd since I presume any objection which would make the marriage illegal such as incest would mean it has to be considered but maybe that's because it's unlikely the person could reliable show that it's the case so if it's denied it won't stop the wedding whereas a marriage certificate may be sufficient grounds to stop the wedding (obviously if the bride or groom walks out or refuses to go ahead it will stop too). This source linked to from the earlier agrees it's rare [31] nowadays in the US. It does point out is that in the modern world where some jurisdictions require marriage licences the need for objections (and I guess the chance of them succeeding) is perhaps low since a lot of that would have been checked out already. One thing it got me thinking, in a number of jurisdictions civil marriages may only (or are commonly) performed at a registrar's office or via some other government functionary and the ceremony is technically just a formality. In such situations, objections would be irrelevant since the people are already married. I believe this is fairly common in Malaysia among non Muslims anyway [32]. (I don't however know whether objections are even asked among Christians in Malaysia so it may be a moot point.) Back to the main issue, there are a few comments in this [33] which tell of some semi-joking objections as well as one were the ex-husband called up before hand and said he was going to stop it, but was of course stopped. And also some other interesting or odd stories (e.g. one who loved someone else and told a friend a few days before but said they would go ahead because the arrangements had been made and the person they loved didn't ask them not to do it; a few months later this person told the same friend the same thing!) 2 celebrants say they've never had objections nor no-shows/walkaways. www.associatedcontent.com/article/178812/what_to_do_if_someone_objects_at_your.html (spam filter) and one of the comments in the earlier link suggest in a number of jurisdictions it's up to the couple (but if they do have it, they should make sure they know how to deal with it). This [34] mentions someone whispering don't do it loud enough so the groom could hear which seems semi rude, but no objections were asked. Nil Einne (talk) 19:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The "or forever hold your peace" bit interests me. Say I was aware one of the parties was already married to someone else, but for whatever reason I chose to remain silent about it at the wedding. Does that prevent me from ever telling the authorities about it later? What difference would it make who later let the cat out of the bag? The bigamous party would still be in hot water and the marriage would still be deemed invalid. I would also be in hot water for not speaking up when I had the chance, but that seems to be a different issue. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of friends of mine quarreled so fiercely just few weeks before the wedding, that he ate all the invitation cards. However, they eventually made peace and got happily married. But everybody was really holding his breath at the moment of "speak now or forever hold your peace". --pma (talk) 20:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just occasionally the Internet throws up something delightful that makes you very happy. I will treasure the mental image of your friend eating his wedding invitation cards for years to come. Thank you! Karenjc21:26, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Megrahi's arrival at Tripoli Airport
I suspect I won't get an answer to this but here goes anyway - when the Lockerbie bomber Abdelbasset al Megrahi arrived at Tripoli Airport after his release on compassionate grounds from his Scottish Prison Cell, he was pictured arriving to a rapturous welcome. On the plane's steps there were many people including Colonel Gaddhafi's son - but behind them was a young man maybe in his mid 20's wearing a smart grey suit and carrying a bag on a shoulder strap over his left shoulder, keeping a very serious, almost nervous look on his face. And later in the week when Megrahi was seeen meeting Gaddhafi, the same young man emerged from Megrahi's car, this time wearing a traditional (white satin) Arabic robe, but also standing behind the two principals with the same serious look about him. Anyone know who he is? Maybe a relative, or a diplomatic escort? Just curious. 92.23.188.84 (talk) 15:29, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could be private security. The release of a suspected bomber is sure to cause some security concerns, but that is just a wild guess on my part. Livewireo (talk) 16:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Given that Gaddhafi's private plane was en route to Glasgow to collect before the announcement of al Megrahi's release was made, it clear the Scottish and Libyan authorities were in contact about the logistics of his return. I expect, then, that the gentleman in question is a member of the Libyan Presidential Guard, or another state security detail. See [35]Rockpocket17:15, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Need the answer
What is the term when referring to a calender date the has the same numbers?
For example: 09/09/09 or 10/10/10
(Sept/9th/2009) or (Oct./10th/2010)
Why do you think there is a term for this? --Anon, 23:28 UTC, August 28, 2009.
Heroin
Can an administrator change the name of the article from the (defunct trade name) "Heroin" to the chemical name (and like all other drugs on Wikipedia) "Diacetylmorphine"? There is no article named "Ecstasy" but there is an article named MDMA. Thanks Tdinatale (talk) 23:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
^Craven,R and Hirnle,C. (2006). "Fundamentals of nursing: Human health and function. Forth edition". Antipyretics. 11 (7–8): 1044. PMID15636181.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
![[2]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Guardia_Civil_a_caballo.jpg){kind=link}
![[4]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_1DJYJashoT0/SZM5dJSKPmI/AAAAAAAACL8/e6B02m2ZuIs/s320/sunblock.jpg){kind=link}
![[14]](http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/NEWIMAGES/arctic.seaice.color.000.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[19]](http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/46276000/jpg/_46276188_shopper466pa.jpg){kind=link}
