Miscellaneous desk
< October 24	<< Sep \| Oct \| Nov >>	October 26 >

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

October 25[edit]

Travelling in NYC on Thanksgiving[edit]

I am heading to NYC 22 Nov to catch Jets/Patriots game that night. I land at LaGuardia around 2pm and my hotel is Lexington and 50th. Not familiar with NYC traffic or congestion at all. My question is to someone who would be. How long will it take to travel to the stadium (by public transit) from that location and are there any special considerations I should take? Thanks131.137.245.206 (talk) 13:46, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is some information here. It is a holiday, so I would not expect any particular traffic; by the time you get to Manhattan, the parade will be a memory. I would advise the NJTransit over the PATH, PATH service is likely to be very infrequent after the game. I'd be prompt leaving after the game, I don't know how often the service from Secaucus Junction to NY Penn Station will be at that time of night on Thanksgiving but it's bound to be better than PATH... you might want to take a cab from Penn Station to your hotel afterwards, public transportation will be slower. That same website should have information on how best to get from your hotel to Penn Station. I'm compulsively early, but even so I would leave sometime around 5:30, to allow time to get to Penn Station, get your ticket (machine). Remember, 80,000 people are converging on that stadium, and some will be coming by train.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:06, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NJTransit used to run a bus from the Port Authority Bus Terminal to the stadium, but they may have eliminated it due to the train service. That would probably be more convenient for you. The Meadowlands is not that far away from Manhattan, but the public transit there developed rather late.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:08, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Train traffic (and road traffic) is extremely heavy on Thanksgiving in NY. I have never taken the train to the Meadowlands, but every other NJ Transit train I have ridden on Thanksgiving has been standing room only, with the aisles so tightly packed that the conductors don't even try to collect tickets. Don't carry anything but a wallet, and don't wear a heavy coat unless the forecast really calls for it. μηδείς (talk) 16:51, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious: Would it be easier to take a bus from LaGuardia to Newark Airport and take public transportation from there to the Meadowlands? 69.62.243.48 (talk) 22:33, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't imagine a situation in which you would have to transfer in Newark could possibly be better than a direct trip to the Meadowlands. I would take a taxi from the Hotel to the Port Authority Bus Terminal, which should run around $10. In fact, I'd probably take a taxi the whole way--much more comfortable and reliable. Best to call a limo service (black limo which has to be called, not a yellow taxi you can hail on the street) and negotiate a set rate ahead of time (expect about $50/$60 plus $5-$10 tip) and leave at least two hours before game time. μηδείς (talk) 03:50, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Griffin and Nicky Campbell[edit]

Griffin recently made some comments about the B&B that turned away a gay couple.

Apparently, during a subsequent interview on BBC Radio 5 Live, Campbell gave Griffin a very hard time on the subject. I'd like to hear the interview. I guess it's available somewhere on BBC iPlayer - can anyone help me find it?

Please, no soapboxing here about Griffin's comments. --Dweller (talk) 15:09, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's a clip here http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0070htg/clips. Itsmejudith (talk) 15:15, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. Thank you. --Dweller (talk) 16:47, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mains Adaptor for Mongolia[edit]

What type of mains connection do they have in Mongolia? Is it the same as South Korea? KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 16:03, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mains electricity by country says it's either CEE 7/5 (French) (which is also used in S Korea) or CEE 7/16 (Europlug) (which is not used in S Korea). The two should be compatible, and you should be able to use a standard European adaptor. The supply is 220V/50Hz, so you shouldn't need a voltage adaptor for any UK or European equipment. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 16:21, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So for my UK-bought PC, I can use a Euro adaptor? And my Hungarian-bought PC will not need an adaptor? KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 16:28, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's what the article says. It's unsourced though. But here is a page with nice pictures of what fits and what doesn't. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 16:46, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On re-reading that seems to come across a little sarky. Sorry - didn't mean to. Yes to both questions. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 16:49, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't take it the least bit sarcastic, mate. You've been a great help. Thanks! KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:02, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For a moment there I was wondering whether power points in Mongolia and Hungary might be similar, then I remembered that it was unlikely, as the Ural–Altaic languages hypothesis is now widely rejected. Shortly afterwards, I realised how very silly I was to even think like that in the first place.--Shirt58 (talk) 02:40, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's one reader who smiled. —Tamfang (talk) 21:34, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did, too (though I believe partly in the theory, due to cross-plantation of vocabulary, which is common in languages spoken by people in juxtaposition to each other - the Hungarian people came from Siberia). The similarity in electricity points however, is probably more due to Soviet Russian influence. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 03:25, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

synthetic egg?[edit]

-I want to bake a cake

-One of my friends is allergic to egg

-I want to use some alternative he can eat

-It still needs to make a decent cake and taste right

-Anyone know of anything I could use?

-213.104.247.116 (talk) 18:09, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might ask if he is specifically allergic to either egg yolk or white (although more yolk will make it more "rich"). If so, you can use the other. Otherwise, I don't know of a single ingredient you can substitute in for egg, in the same quantities, to make your recipe work. Here are some egg-less cake recipes, though: [1]. StuRat (talk) 18:20, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: DO NOT DO THIS if the person has an allergy. There is no way to remove all the white from an egg yolk; egg yolks are coated in egg white even after separation. This is a very good way to make someone extremely sick, perhaps even requiring an ambulance trip to the hospital and expensive drugs. And that's the best case scenario. Bad idea. --NellieBlyMobile (talk) 03:15, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That rather depends on the degree of the allergy, doesn't it ? If they just get a bit queasy after eating several eggs, then the amount in a cake with separated eggs shouldn't be a problem. If they need a trip to the emergency room whenever they touch any egg, then avoid all egg products (I wouldn't personally make any food for such a person, they should exclusively have "prescription foods and drinks", where all possibility of cross-contamination can be eliminated). StuRat (talk) 23:44, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many of the things eggs do in recipes is to act as an emulsifier and binder. You may be able to purchase Soy-based lecithin (the emulsifying agent in eggs) and see if that helps approximate the role of the egg in your cooking. --Jayron32 19:34, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have cooked boxed cake and Bisquick recipes which have said you can substitute vegetable oil for the egg. Google searches haven't been very helpful--you might actually want to take some boxes off the shelf at a store and see what they say. A little sour cream might also help. μηδείς (talk) 19:51, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Google not very helpful? if you search for 'recipe for eggless cake' you will get more recipes than you have time to read, most of them do not have tricky ingredients. Good luck. Richard Avery (talk) 07:35, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, not at all on the subject I was addressing; substituting oil for the egg. Your links on that would be appreciated. μηδείς (talk) 16:42, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Egg-free cakes are really really easy. Just Google "vegan cake recipes". Or just go straight here.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 20:23, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are commercially available egg replacers such as Ener-G, which are close to being as protein-rich as actual egg. Alternatively, try grinding flax seeds. AlexTiefling (talk) 20:59, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article on egg substitutes, see Egg_substitute#Cooking_substitutes. It mentions a few others, including applesauce. I have also mixed some of these for recipes, such as half vegetable oil and half applesauce. SemanticMantis (talk) 02:45, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thought applesauce was a substitute for oil, in that it adds moisture, not emulsification and binding. StuRat (talk) 04:24, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've substituted Coke/Pepsi in chocolate boxed cake mix in a pinch. It worked 3 out of 4 times. - Purplewowies (talk) 04:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do not try to modify or substitute eggs in traditional recipes, this usually goes wrong or at least won't taste right. Rather go for an original (usually vegan) egg-free recipe. Post Punk Kitchen has some very nice ones, see [2], e.g. [3] given the season or you can also easily use the cupcake batter and turn it into a cake (just adjust baking time). Even if your friend happens to know whether he's allergic to the yolk or whites, do not try to just use either one, as separating them might lead to either one contaminated with the other (without you noticing) and depending on the severity of your friend's allergy this might be already enough to trigger an allergic reaction. (I also do have a friend who's allergic to eggs, and it's actually not that hard to do egg-free cooking, once you're a bit used to it and know where to look for recipes). 2001:620:400:9:21A:64FF:FE9D:DB60 (talk) 11:49, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are products such as 'No-Egg' by Orgran which work great in cakes as an egg replacement - it's very easy to get in the UK. I would recommend it over substituting oil, etc. Other similar products may exist. --Michig (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Baking powder and water? I think I remember using that a while back (I have/had an egg allergy as well) – Connormah (talk) 03:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some people hinted at this above, but my impression when I looked in to this once before is it depends a fair amount on what the primary purpose/s of eggs in your recipe is which is why there are quite a few fairly different suggestions. (It also depends on what you have available.) I do agree with our IPv6 anon friend your best bet if you don't have experience cooking withyout eggs is that you'll likely get best results from choosing a recipe which has hopefully been designed by someone with such experience. (N.B. My reply is to the OP not to μηδείς.) Nil Einne (talk) 09:09, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can an outside-the-park homer ever be an error?[edit]

In last night's World Series game between the San Francisco Giants and some other team, Peralta's homer in the ninth inning appeared to be helped out of the park by Angel Pagan's glove. If he had let it go, I expect it would have been a double (or possibly a triple) off the center-field wall.

Anyway, Peralta obviously got credit for the dinger; Pagan didn't do anything wrong. Actually, in the game situation as it was, the homer was probably better for the Giants than a double, because it left the bases empty and the Tigers still five runs behind with two outs to go. But I was wondering — what if a fielder did do something obviously wrong? I'm having trouble picturing exactly how it would go, but let's say the ball could have been caught with ordinary effort, but through some spectacular clumsiness, the fielder instead pushed it out of the park. Clearly the batter and all men on base score, but is it a home run, or an error? --Trovatore (talk) 19:44, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On May 26, 1993 in a game involving the Texas Rangers and Cleveland Indians, Jose Canseco clearly aided a ball over the fence that wouldn't have been a home run other-wise. It's a famous play with the ball bouncing off of Canseco's head and going over the fence. You could look up the game stats on Retrosheet to see if Canseco was credited with an error. Retrosheet is sending my Norton Antivirus into apoplexy over a "malicious script", so I'm not loading it and caveat emptor, but generally Retrosheet is considered a great way to get historical info on old baseball games. --Jayron32 19:51, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Found the boxscore at Baseball Reference.com instead. here it is. You can see that Carlos Martinez is credited with the home run, and Canseco didn't get any error, even though it was clearly aided over the fence by Canseco. Had the ball not gone out of the park, that would have been an obvious fielding error: Baseball usually agrees that a fly ball that contacts a player should be caught by that player, else it is an error (this is not true for balls that hit the ground near a player that the player should have caught). Bugs may want to weigh in on an official ruling, but had that not been a homer, that would have been an E-9 clearly. Had the ball his the ground instead of Canseco's head, it would have been a ground-rule double. Here's video of the home run (the date is wrong on the video, that's why it took me some time to find the right game). --Jayron32 19:59, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MLB rule 6.09h explains it a somewhat convoluted way, as follows: "The batter becomes a runner when... Any fair fly ball is deflected by the fielder into the stands, or over the fence into foul territory, in which case the batter shall be entitled to advance to second base; but if deflected into the stands or over the fence in fair territory, the batter shall be entitled to a home run. However, should such a fair fly be deflected at a point less than 250 feet from home plate, the batter shall be entitled to two bases only."[4] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:28, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. So I wouldn't have guessed this: Apparently if a ball is headed out in the right field corner, and you can't catch it but you can get up high enough to whack it right of the foul pole, you can change what would have been a homer into a ground-rule double. Not the way I would have written the rule, myself.

But I'm still a little unclear on whether this excludes the possibility of an error on any play in which this happens. That seems counterintuitive. --Trovatore (talk) 22:36, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a home run, it can't be an error, and vice versa. And once it occurs, it's a dead-ball situation, so no error can be charged. The rules don't always explain themselves, so we're left to guess why it's considered a homer and not a 4-base error. My guess is that they didn't want to get into disputes about whether the potential catch was "ordinary effort" or not, so they made a decision that any such events are home runs. You raise an interesting question about intentionally deflecting it. I'll see if I can find out something about that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:04, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I can't think of any circumstances on which a single pitch can result in both an error and a home run, however that home run occurs, it means that the player is awarded the four bases through his own exertion and therefore anything the fielders did was irrelevant. Agree with Bugs on the reasoning. I don't think a player could or would act in the manner Travatore suggests, basically if they can touch it with the glove, they're going to try to catch it, the zone where they can only deflect it and not catch it is mere inches and they wouldn't plan that way, they'd try for the catch.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing anything about it in the rules, other than the prohibition against throwing your glove or cap at the ball. And like you, I wonder why someone would purposely create a double, as if he's in position to control its flight, one would think he would simply catch it. But you never know what strange things might happen on a ball field. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:20, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I could see it happening accidentally, of course, and that's the point of the rule. The fielder could be poised on the foul line near the fence and jump up and not quite get a grip on it and it goes either fair or foul, and either within the playing field or over the fence. It would be very tough for a fielder to plan that exact scenario and resist his natural instinct to try to catch it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:24, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm thinking scenarios where his glove comes off (accidentally, not throwing at the ball) and so forth. He's still going to try to catch it rather than deflect it. Even barehanded. And any intentional deflection would be into the field of play, to try to get it into the infield and get someone out. No one would recall the rule that quickly.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:31, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to put a wrap up on this, remember that anything that happens "accidentally" isn't an error. An error is a mistake. Tripping on the way to stop a grounder heading out of the infield isn't an error. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:17, 29 October 2012 (UTC) (Of course, I may be in error.)[reply]

I'm not sure I understand the distinction you're making here between a "mistake" and "something you do accidentally," but in any case it's true that "mental mistakes" are specifically not counted as errors (see Official scorer#Errors). In general though, this is a fairly gray area where the official scorer's personal judgment has a lot of influence. Also, referring back to the original questioner - it is definitely not the case that giving up a home run rather than a double is ever preferable for the fielding team! After all, the most damage a runner can do after hitting a double is to later score...which of course is guaranteed if he hits a home run instead. -Elmer Clark (talk) 17:26, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MLB scoring rules 10.12[5] starts this way: "An error is a statistic charged against a fielder whose action has assisted the team on offense, as set forth in this Rule 10.12" It then goes into a long list of what constitutes an error and what does not constitute an error. It specifically talks about "mental mistakes or misjudgments", which is what DOR is talking about. I'm not seeing anything specific about the OP's question, but I think the answer is implied: "...whose misplay (fumble, muff or wild throw) prolongs the time at bat of a batter." Apparently the thinking is that a ball bouncing off a fielder's head does not qualify as a "misplay". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]