Wikipedia:Reference desk/all

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikipedia Reference Desk - All recent questions
WP:RD/ALL redirects here. You may also be looking for Wikipedia:Resolving disputes, Wikipedia:Redirect or Wikipedia:Deletion review.

This page lists all the recent questions asked on the Wikipedia reference desk by category. To ask a new question, please select one of the categories below. To answer a question, click on the "edit" link beside the question.

For information on any topic, choose a category for your question:

Computing reference deskP computing.svg
Science reference deskP physics.svg
Mathematics reference deskP mathematics.svg
Humanities reference deskP art.png
Computers and IT Science Mathematics Humanities
Computing, information technology, electronics, software and hardware Biology, chemistry, physics, medicine, geology, engineering and technology Mathematics, geometry, probability, and statistics History, politics, literature, religion, philosophy, law, finance, economics, art, and society
Language reference deskP literature.svg
Entertainment reference deskP music.svg
Miscellaneous reference deskP question.svg
Reference desk archivesP archive.svg
Language Entertainment Miscellaneous Archives
Spelling, grammar, word etymology, linguistics, language usage, and requesting translations Sports, popular culture, movies, music, video games, and TV shows Subjects that don't fit in any of the other categories Old questions are archived daily
Help deskWikipedia-logo.png
Village pumpWikipedia-logo.png
New contributors' help pageWikipedia-logo.png
Help desk Village pump New contributors' help page
Ask general questions about using Wikipedia Ask about specific policies and operations of Wikipedia A range of services to answer newcomers' questions
Help manual MediaWiki handbook Citing Wikipedia Resolving disputes Virtual classroom
Information and instructions on every aspect of Wikipedia Information about the software that runs Wikipedia How to cite Wikipedia as a reference For resolving issues between users An advanced guide on everything Wikipedia
See also the Wikipedia department directory



September 29[edit]

Edit box font size and Chrome[edit]

Right now I am using a 2009 Gateway running Widows 7 to edit WP. When I use the Chrome browser, the edit box font size for pages like the ref desk display at something like 6 to 8pts. I have looked for a default minimum font display size, and cannot find one. Is there eaither a Chrome or WP setting I should be looking for? The edit bozes with IE 11 and Firefox display normally. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 00:46, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Just to clarify, it's just the edit box? The rest of Wikipedia and other sites when displayed in Chrome are at a good size?
If it is indeed all text, then try hitting CTRL-0. Additionally, CTRL-- (control and the minus key) will decrease the text size and CTRL-+ will increase it. CTRL-0 will bring everything back to the default size (cancelling changes made by CTRL-- and CTRL-+). Dismas|(talk) 16:03, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
No, bizarrely, as far as I can tell, it is only the edit box at wikipedia, and only with the Chrome browser. The print is so small I can't make it out, so I have to use CTRL + to expand it, and then everything else of course gets huge. I am assuming there's got to be some weird glitch. μηδείς (talk) 20:31, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
The following steps might help tell what's causing the problem:
  1. Right click in the edit box and choose Inspect Element. The Developer Tools will appear.
  2. In the right side, click on Computed. This will show the final styles used for the edit box.
  3. Look for an item called font-size. Click the triangle to expand the item. This will show the source of this style.
What size is shown? What source is shown? This information might provide clues about what to check next. --Bavi H (talk) 01:55, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Bavi H, it says font size = 16.5 px and all the other font values are "normal". I use WP monobook too, in case that's relevant. The actual size is smaller than 8pt Calibri as displayed on MS word in the default viewing mode, I would guess 7 or maybe even 6pt, although MS Word doesn't go below 8pt for normal text text. I am editing in firefox right now, and everything is normal. I also did click on the restore default settings in the inspect element window, but nothing changed. μηδείς (talk) 20:55, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm using Internet Explorer, but I'm assuming the Developer Tools in both browsers are close enough to the same. I set my Wikipedia preferences to use MonoBook, then examined the computed style of an edit box. I clicked the triangle next to font-size to see what's "inside" it. I see:
 ▼ [√] font-size: 13.33px
      [√] div#globalWrapper- 127%   load.php (1)
      [√] body- x-small             load.php (1)
This says the font-size is originally set to x-small in a body rule, then modified by 127% in a div rule, yeilding a final value of 13.33px. You're likely getting something similar. (I was hoping you might see a more obvious problem. For example, if you saw the final computed size was a small number, and saw some rule from a file like "user.css", that might suggest you need to disable a user preference somewhere in Wikipedia or a browser add-on.) If the computed styles don't suggest a cause, then I guess Chrome just renders the text box font size differently that other browsers.
  • If the problem started recently, maybe a recent update of Chrome changed how the textarea font size behaves. You might search for the exact version number and terms like textarea font size to see if others have reported the issue.
  • Maybe Chrome is only applying the x-small rule to the edit box text. Try unchecking the box next the x-small rule and see what happens. Or uncheck the 127% rule. Or uncheck both. This won't really solve the issue, but might help describe the problem in a bug report.
  • You might work around the issue with user CSS. In Wikipedia, you can edit one of the user CSS files in your preferences, but this will also affect other browsers you use. To just make a user CSS in just Chrome, you might install Stylish and write a new rule. Either way, trying entering something like textarea { font-size: 120%; } or textarea { font-size: 16pt; } and see if that helps.
--Bavi H (talk) 02:08, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I spent about an hour toggling the settings last night. Nothing under the inspect element windows showed any weird smalling factors. What I did eventually find was that Chrome was set at a 67% zoom factor for some reason. Setting that back to 100 made the edit box legible, if not still undersized. I think what I need to do is find out how to smallen the size of default text so that when the zoom is at 125% the normal text appears, well, normal.
As for recent changes, this 2009 Gateway is my backup computer, my preferred computer has some keyboard issues I probably won't budget to be fixed for a while, unless I decide to do so myself. Since the 2009 was slow and crashing all the time I reinstalled it from the rescue disks, and at that time and for the first time installed Chrome. Chrome works okay on the 2013 ASUS with the dead keyboard, also running windows 7, but it simply works horribly with this computer, with hesitant scrolling and a whole lot of other problems. In any case, The edit boz text is legible, so at this point I just have to spend the time getting the default text smaller. μηδείς (talk) 00:09, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The cost of Video Conference Business Meeting[edit]

Why is video conferencing so horribly expensive? And why is Skype free of charge (for most services)? Is is so difficult to stream real-time information reliably?

According to [1] 2 hours would cost an estimated total of $2,070.

OK, short answer is because people, or business and governmental clients, pay for it. However, couldn't other IT companies provide the same service at a much cheaper rate and skew the market prices?--Jubilujj 2015 (talk) 07:17, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

If you're looking for a market analysis that accurately explains why professional video systems can command a high price ... prepare to be amazed! It costs loads of money to get a good answer to that type of question.
Although free information is a pervasive societal trend, there are a few areas - like well-researched business analysis - where information is decidedly not free. Who is out in the marketplace paying six figures for a video teleconference system? What motivates their purchase? How many transactions per year are taking place in this market? Companies like Gartner can sell you answers at market-price.
Although you might assess a product like Cisco TelePresence, and consider its service equivalent to a free alternative, evidently you are not the target customer for a hundred-thousand-dollar product. Those customers do exist, and they willingly pay large fees. Understanding who they are, why they pay, how much they can spend, is a valuable piece of information that you probably can't get on the cheap, in the clear. If this information was available, it would throw off the entire game-theoretic basis for this type of marketplace. Nimur (talk) 16:32, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
OK, maybe the issue could be focuses from the perspective of what computing hardware and software we need, not how the market works. After all this is the Computing RD. If someone pays more for a 1 hours business conference than it costs to travel to Europe, there must be a market reason, but from a computing perspective this is irrelevant. The question is more what hardware, software and access to infrastructure do we need to hi-def low-latency video conference across an ocean. What item in there makes it not payable to lil' people like me? --Jubilujj 2015 (talk) 19:28, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
I cannot achieve hi-def low-latency video conferencing with my internet connection, even to the nearest town, so I would need a dedicated link, probably delivered via a series of specially installed microwave links which would cost many thousands of pounds. Skype is a joke here, almost unusable. Are there places where Skype isn't annoying in its delays and lags? Were I a business with highly-paid employees, I would pay the high cost of proper video conferencing just to avoid the irritating delays in cheap "skype-type" connections. I assume that the companies who provide such links have software that sends and receives multiple-redundant packets to avoid stutters and lags. Perhaps we have some experts here who know the technicalities. Dbfirs 21:15, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Do you know that these very-expensive video conferencing systems have not had a huge slump in sales in recent years? Some businesses do use Skype. Some of them curse it daily, when it doesn't have near the reliability and robustness that some paid services have. My employer now uses Vidyo, which does seem a decent bit more reliable than free services, but I have no idea what they pay for their license. You might want to read up on the history of some of these "free" services like Skype. How do they make money? Do they make any money, aside from securing additional rounds of venture capital? Sure, someone made a bunch of money when Microsoft acquired Skype, but that doesn't meant that the unit by itself is in any sense profitable. It could just be an attractive loss leader for MS. I also recall that Skype started out as a distributed service, so that when you used skype, your computer was also being used as free infrastructure for other calls. But I think that has changed now. SemanticMantis (talk) 21:09, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
The $1000/hr price is for a "telepresence suit", like this one: [2]. A remote group meeting would almost feel like a face-to-face meeting. A company would save lots of time and money using it. The service provider even cares that rooms in both ends have the same decoration, lightning and so on, for a more realistic immersion. There are also less expensive systems, that look like as if both participants were watching each other on a hi-def TV without network hiccups for $2,500/month flat. Or you could use a desktop video-confering like Skype (which is only free for basic uses) or ooVoo, for something less than $10/month.
It looks like the whole market spectrum is covered by some type of service of varying price and quality. Scicurious (talk) 22:18, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
It's worth mentioning that "free of charge" doesn't really mean "free". If you read the so-called "privacy" statement that goes along with Skype, you'll see that the only privacy they really guarantee is that the actual content of your call will be kept private. Who you talked to, who is in your address book, your name, email, etc, etc - are all theirs to do pretty much whatever they want with. They go to a lot of pains to ask you to connect up with your Facebook page so they can suck more information out of there. That kind of data is pretty valuable. Now, imagine you're a business - all of your customers and service providers are talking to you via video conferencing - now Microsoft know who you are, what you do, AND who all of your customers are. Would one of your competitors like to know who your customers are? When you talk to them? For how long you talked? Which of your employees were talking to them? What those employees' private email addresses are so they can poach your best people? I think they'd quite like to know that stuff...and Microsoft (it seems) will be happy to sell them that information. How much is it worth to you to keep your competitors ignorant of this? Probably more than the cost of a video conferencing system that guarantees actual, useful, privacy.
That said, if you use Skype to get free video calls to your mom, who lives halfway across the planet (as is the case for me) - then having Microsoft know that is not a big deal. So pick your battles! SteveBaker (talk) 14:59, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I work for a global enterprise organization and have used Cisco Telepresence on many occasions. We have several rooms around the world that have 3 60"+ televisions that make up one end of the room, you sit around a table that terminates at the screens, which displays the corresponding room you are conferencing with, with a similar set up it looks like you're all sitting around the same table. You can be conferences to more than one room at a time, the system automatically "focuses" on who ever is talking. You can have people who don't have access to a room dialed into the meeting and you can have people watching the meeting online, we've had meetings with 300 people in them.You also have a projector in each room which a presenter can share their computer screen to. I believe the rooms are not just "plugged into the network/internet" but use several dedicated ISDN lines. Also, keep in mind that for business travel, the cost is far more than just the airfare, there's transfers, accommodation, per diem. Vespine (talk) 23:28, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

GTA San Andreas save files[edit]

Why all GTA San Andreas saved game files I downloaded from the internet start from the game's beginning in the airport and how to fix that (I'm running licensed game version)? All have the same file title as my original save file, GTASAsf1.b. Changing file name doesn't help, even though the slot's title is correctly displayed in the game. My path is C:\Program Files\Rockstar Games\GTA San Andreas\data where saved games are stored (in Win 7). Reportedly this may have something to do with game slot number, but I don't how to fix this either. Thanks in advance.-- (talk) 15:56, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

PC Gaming Wiki's page on GTA:SA has some info about incompatabilities between saved games generated by older versions and the newer ones. It also has links to converters which it says fixes these problems. -- Finlay McWalterTalk 16:15, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
You must be running the "Second Edition" - all GTA San Andreas SKUs published since the Hot Coffee scandal have slightly different game logic (main.scm, script.img and several others were changed besides a file check for edited assets) hence why a downgrader is needed. Blake Gripling (talk) 10:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Strength of password[edit]

Is the password '++++++++' equally strong as 'dJ+dhg3*'? A cracking algorithm won't know that I decided to repeat the same character 8 times, and when I decided to do that I had all letters and special characters available. --Scicurious (talk) 20:24, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

See Password_strength#Entropy_as_a_measure_of_password_strength. It depends on the threat model, but the entropy is fixed by the string length and the size of symbol list. Attacks designed by humans against human-generated passwords may well start with strings of constant symbols, string including sequential substrings, etc. SemanticMantis (talk) 20:46, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Maybe I should try to incorporate the following into the section that SemanticMantis linked, but I'll put it here for now.
Basically the strength of your password is (the log of) its index in your adversary's dictionary. The problem is you don't know what's in your adversary's dictionary. It may not contain ++++++++ early on, but you can't be sure.
What randomly chosen passwords buy you is a guaranteed high probability of not being in the dictionary. If the attacker is going to test, say, 250 words (and this is something you can estimate, based on the price/performance of current hardware and how much they'd stand to gain by cracking your password), and your password is chosen uniformly at random from 280 words, the chance that they will crack your password is at most 1 in 230, no matter how cleverly they choose their dictionary. (This is similar to the fact that you will correctly guess 50% of random coin flips no matter what strategy you use; the attacker here has exactly 2−30 odds if their 250 words are a subset of your 280, and worse odds if they aren't.) In contrast, if you invent a password in your head, there's no way to bound the probability that the password is on the list. It's dangerous to rely on your adversary not having a good model of people's psychological preferences for certain passwords over others.
Note that what matters is how you generate the password, not what the password is. You might randomly generate ++++++++. That's okay because the chance of doing so is small and is included in the 2−30 upper bound. -- BenRG (talk) 03:01, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
True in theory, but in the real world, if your random password generator randomly picks "password" or "12345678", run it again.
Also, by international law, we can't discuss this without adding the following links:
--Guy Macon (talk) 07:22, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Per the last one, rubber hose cryptography is an interesting read. One Julian Assange worked on some of the early Deniable_encryption software to counteract this, named rubberhose... SemanticMantis (talk) 15:31, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Well responded, Citizen Macon. And in this context we might also mention . —Steve Summit (talk) 13:52, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
@BenRG: I was personally a little disappointed in how short and unreferenced that sections is. I for one encourage you to add anything you can to it. SemanticMantis (talk) 15:33, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
BenRG's statement is true more than just "in theory", but it's the a priori probability that is known. After (it happens that) the generator has chosen "password", the a posteriori probability that its choice (i.e., that string!) is in (and near the beginning of!) the attacker's dictionary is rather larger, even if never known precisely. --Tardis (talk) 18:44, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Those are all good answers. Let me just add that it's quite likely that the string "++++++++" just made it into at least one cracking dictionary. —Steve Summit (talk) 13:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
In this case, I'd change my password as soon as I get a free minute.--Scicurious (talk) 19:30, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

https problem?[edit]

Starting a few days ago, Firefox (41.0) started giving the error

Error trips on many/most new connection attempts, to several urls (e.g. facebook, WP, google, etc.). Page always loads correctly when I click "try again", or manually reload/re-navigate. Problem has not manifested yet with other browsers, though my testing has been very limited. Problem persisted through an upgrade to Firefox. I have not noticed any similar issues with other devices using my same home network. Questions:
1. This has to be on my end, right? The error makes it sound like the server is configured incorrectly, but I can't imagine that so many servers would start having the same problem at once.

2. Is this an https problem?

3. Could this be some sort of malware or man-in-the-middle shenanigans?

4. Any ideas how to resolve the issue? Firefox is set to use https whenever available, a setting that I prefer to keep.
Thanks, SemanticMantis (talk) 20:55, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

This can occur for many reasons. One (usually benign) reason would be a corrupted certificate database. That database is a file, cert8.db located in your Mozilla user profile. You can delete your entire profile (taking a sledgehammer to the problem); or simply surgically delete only this file "cert8.db" from your profile directory; that will cause Firefox to "start over" with the default certificate database. This is the most probable cause, and the solution is directly-actionable.
The database may have been corrupted by a bug in Firefox, or an extension. It may have been caused benignly because of a crash or hang in the application. It may also have been corrupted by - and here's the bad news - malware or malicious behavior (internal or external to Firefox). (However, if it actually was malware, it didn't accomplish its job; if it had successfully modified your certificates file to inject bogus data, you'd never have seen any error message and never known a problem even existed!) Malicious corruption, in this case, is less likely than file-corruption-due-to-buggy-Firefox.
It is also possible that you actually have a different problem unrelated to the cert database - like a weird network firewall that started being misconfigured very recently. It is also possible that a lurking bug in Firefox is incorrectly showing you these warnings.
Obviously, the error message alone isn't enough to root-cause the problem... but on a hunch, try removing the cert database, and see if it helps.
Nimur (talk) 04:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
@Nimur: So far, so good; thanks! SemanticMantis (talk) 15:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

September 30[edit]

Facetime for android?[edit]

Hello everybody. I have one question: Can i download facetime for android device? My girlfriend have iphone and facetime app ;/ I want too, but i have samsung galaxy 3. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:16, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Edited: I found amazig website, and now i have facetime app on my android, this is the website: (WP:SPAMLINK redacted) Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

That appears to be a link to malware. FaceTime is an Apple product and is only available on iOS and Mac. It is not presently available on other systems. Nimur (talk) 04:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Identifying a Google Chrome process[edit]

If I have multiple tabs open in Google Chrome (on Windows 7) and one tab causes my PC to lock up, I'd like to be able to use the Task Manager to close just the affected tab. I am able to bring up Task Manager + Processes, and I do see processes for all the tabs (plus a couple extras). However, I can't identify which process goes with which tab. So, I currently just start randomly killing the processes until I hit the problem tab. I see I can turn on various columns in the Task Manager + Processes window, but none of those seem to help. I had hopes for the "Command Line" column which seems to be the full command line used to spawn the tab, that would presumably include the title, but it seems to truncate at maybe 256 characters, which is apparently before it hits the title. Any other ideas ? StuRat (talk) 17:33, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

ProcExp and ProcMon (free from Microsoft) are the industry-standard tools for this sort of thing. Tevildo (talk) 19:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I may try those. Do you know if either would solve this problem ? StuRat (talk) 01:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
That is, one can obtain them from Microsoft without payment, rather than their being devoid of Microsofticity. Just in case anyone's confused. Tevildo (talk) 19:51, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
A comma after "free" would have made that clear. StuRat (talk) 01:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
I recommend Process Hacker over ProcExp/Process Explorer. It's open source and has a lot more features. I don't think either utility will display Chrome tab names, though. ProcMon/Process Monitor tells you what files and registry keys are accessed by a process, which probably won't help here. -- BenRG (talk) 02:32, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
What do you mean when you say your PC locks up? Apparently it's not a total system freeze, since you can apparently get to Task Manager and kill processes. Is it just Chrome that locks up, so you can't close the tab from within Chrome? In any case, no page should be able to cause a lock up, so this qualifies as a bug in Chrome (or, possibly, something else, like display drivers). If you want, you could check if there is already a Chrome bug report for your issue, and file one if there isn't. -- (talk) 20:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Seems to be a piece of malware that pops up an alert saying I have a virus and have to call some phone number, at which point they would want my credit card number to fix my problem ("my problem" apparently being too much money in my bank account). I close the alert and it pops right back up. I can't select another tab. I could kill and restart Chrome, but I might have something open in another tab, like if I am editing Wikipedia and try looking up something to add to the edit when the malware strikes. If you have a suggestion of how to avoid this type of malware, I'm open to that too, but I also want to know how to identify a Chrome tab's process. StuRat (talk) 01:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Chrome's built-in task manager should solve your problem. Press Shift+Esc or choose More tools → Task manager in the menu. -- BenRG (talk) 02:32, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
I'll try that. Are you sure it allows that selection when an alert on the current tab is "unanswered" ? StuRat (talk) 14:03, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

October 1[edit]

Fast[er] file extracter[edit]


Are there faster file unpackers on the market faster than the latest version of Winrar? I've seen many benchmarks with competitors (e.g., 7Zip, WinZIP), but most of them are about compression ratio or the time required to compress files. For example, a 1.5GB 7zip files takes around 2 or 3 minutes to unpack with Winrar on my PC, despite a 840 Evo SSD. Am I asking too much? Some on the web recommend to increase the process priority, however I'm afraid of it messing with the file's integrity. Matt714 (talk) 02:24, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure most decompressors for most file formats tend to use the same library, so you'll see little difference between 7zip, WinZIP or WinRAR when decompressing the same file. It's unlikely process priority will change anything, unless you're doing something else with significant CPU usage on your computer, however it also won't effect file integrity. For something like 7zip LZMA2 at maximum settings decompressing large files, this will often be CPU limited rather than IO limited, perhaps even on a recent HD decompressing to the same HD (although this will depend a bit on how the OS and decompressor caches, so could vary from 7-zip to WinRAR to WinZIP). So your SSD may very well be irrelevent. Nil Einne (talk) 09:07, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Actually from further testing I'm not sure if decompression normally is CPU limited, even with LZMA2 at maximum settings although I was lazy to test fairly compressible files of large sizes. However I'm also fairly surprised it takes 2-3 minutes to decompress a 1.5GB file. Are you dealing with lots of small files by any chance? SSDs are a lot better at dealing with lots of small files then HDs, but they're still going to be a fair amount slower then when dealing with large files depending also probably on the file system. Alternatively, if you're dealing with extremely compressible files, and extracting something like 75GB from the 1.5GB file, well then SATA-600 is limited to 600MB/s at most and not all SSDs can even achieve that with maximum throughput, so it's not exactly surprising it will take 2+ minutes to write, even if you only have a small number of highly compressible large files. Nil Einne (talk) 17:02, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I just re-tested the 1.5GB file, and it took around 2 minutes (exactly) to extract (not counting the moving time by Windows) -- seems like I was overestimating the required time. My system has a i7-4930k with 16GB DDR3. Also tested 7Zip, and instead of 1m57s it took 2m01s; so WinRar it is Matt714 (talk) 21:14, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

With some more testing, I return to my original statement that decompression may very well be CPU limited presuming we're talking about something like LZMA2 with maximum compression, even with large files. Anyway how many repetitions did you do? A 4 second difference would likely be in the margin of error of any test unless you did probably at least 5 per decompressor including multiple restarts and only have an average of 1 second difference between repetition.

I am a bit surprised given your specs it's taking so long if you're referring to large files. My own testing on a much weaker (single threaded) CPU took slightly under 2 minutes for a 3GB file. However, it will probably depened on precisely how well the file compressed. But are you sure you aren't decompressing a lot of small files? If it's IO limited your CPU is probably largely irrelevant.

BTW why are you moving stuff around, rather then extracting directly in to the desired location? That could easily waste more than 4 seconds.

Nil Einne (talk) 16:06, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

7z files can also be bzip2 compressed, decompression is much slower than LZMA2: 5.28s against 2.23s for 85MB in this test. (At maximum compression level, LZMA2 used 15 times more memory 4MB vs 66 MB) Ssscienccce (talk) 22:02, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
In general, when designing compression algorithms there are always going to be tradeoffs between compression time, decompression time, and compression ratio. If you find you're spending too much time decompressing files, you might want to look for a different algorithm that's optimized for that (and that, yes, might not fare so well on compression time or ratio). —Steve Summit (talk) 13:35, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Why hasn't flash memory become cheap enough to give away?[edit]

The per-byte price of flash-memory storage media, including USB flash drives and SD cards, has continuously dropped over the past decade or so. But the unit prices of commonly available ones haven't decreased nearly as much. While I can now get a 32 GB microSD card for a tenth of the price of a 512 MB SD ten years ago, it still costs in the neighbourhood of $10. Why doesn't anyone make 512 MB cards that now sell for less than a dollar, that could serve as a replacement for optical and floppy disks? While online file transfers have largely taken over, there's still a need for offline media that one can cheaply give away. Are the per-unit fixed production costs so high as to disallow such an approach? Or am I the only one who would want such a product? --Paul_012 (talk) 06:26, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't know where you are located, but in India pen drives are sold for Rs 100-150 (the same as a local beer, or $1.5-$2) and have your 512 MB storage capacity. If they are sold for $1.5-$2 as a unit including postage, I suppose their market price for businesses might be less than the amount of $1 that you refer to. I don't know how does this would compare to the floppy disks of past ages, but it's certainly cheaper than printing 100s of pages.--Scicurious (talk) 07:01, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Yea, it's all that extra junk that goes with it. There's the connector, the plastic case, the package, someone's time to stock it and sell it in the store, etc. They might be able to reduce some of that. I have one flash drive with no case, it's just a circuit board and a connector. Very compact and cheap, but also ugly and fragile. They could maybe sell a package of 100 of those in 512MB size for less than $100 (less than $1 each). If there was enough demand, I'm sure they would. StuRat (talk) 14:00, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

@Paul 012, Scicurious, and StuRat: hardware producers focus on profit. there is not enough people to buy massproduced low capacity flashes in the society to make it profitable.

Are you sure it hasn't? USB sticks are a pretty common giveaway at trade shows etc, and Alibaba shows lots of retailers who'll sell USB sticks in bulk (1 GB for under a $1). Smurrayinchester 15:47, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
(One extra point on giveaways - one disadvantage of flash media is that they're difficult to write in bulk. You can fairly easily get machines which accept a big pile of blank CDs or DVDs, and can just write them, label them and spit them back out, but for most companies writing a file to a big pile of USB sticks or memory cards still has to be done manually (unless you can do it at the manufacturer during formatting). You can make it easier by using USB hubs/multi-card readers, but it's still much more manual, and still more expensive than a cheapo optical disk.) Smurrayinchester 12:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I have a drawer full of USB sticks that I've been given. Some don't work at all and I toss them to the garbage. Some don't handle rewrite and shrink in size every time I delete a file. A few (very few) have quality that I'd pay a tiny bit for. The only real use I've found is to put movies on them for my kids so they can plug it into the TV and watch them. Turns out that USB sticks don't scratch and turn to crap as easy as DVDs. (talk) 17:17, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Where are the files of a tool in Linux[edit]

How can I find what files a tool is using? I know that the binary 'fortune' is stored at /usr/games/fortune, and that the data is stored at /usr/share/games/fortunes. The first can be discoverd with 'whereis fortune', but what command would output the second? Or simply output a list of directories being accessed by a tool, be it for reading or writing files? That is, how can I monitor what a tool is doing. --Scicurious (talk) 13:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

lsof will get you most of the way there... but it takes some skill to use and understand lsof output. It also won't tell you if the file access is more indirect, e.g. if a helper process or daemon is involved.
For me, the more interesting question is: how can I determine which source-code was used to build a specific executable program that is on my *nix system? This is more useful to me; with source, I can determine and debug program behavior (including, but not limited to, file system access). Unfortunately, finding source can be a lot more difficult: essentially, you depend on your software vendor to maintain a complete "reverse look-up" database that maps specific source projects to specific files that ship with the "distro." Few distributors make this procedure easy; there is often a lot of hunting and guessing. My favorite commercial Unix distributor makes this lookup process much easier, but their software is regrettably non-free. Linux, on the other hand, is free - but the source comes from thousands of places and is managed by an uncountable number of independent contributors and organizations. So, if I boot up my trusty and reliable Ubuntu 9.04 box, and I find "fortune" on my disk at /usr/local/bin/ ... it is not easy to know who authored, built, and delivered that version of binary. I have to dig through old Canonical archives, mailing lists, and FTP servers; and I have to already know where to look.
Nimur (talk) 14:10, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
use rpm -ql package-name to see what files belong to a package (RPM-based distros; there must be a similar command for dpkg.) You can monitor file access by tracing a process's syscalls. For me, strace worked well. I've used it on two or three occasions to investigate bugs (in unrelated software) which I would later report to the maintainers Asmrulz (talk) 16:26, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
The above answers are useful, but for data that "belongs" to a certain program (like fortune), if the packager follows standards like the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS), you can just look at the standard directories. In this case, fortune is following the FHS, and so it keeps the fortune lists in /usr/share/games where they belong. The "Unix way" has long been to store files in a standardized directory tree, rather than just scattering them wherever as is the norm on some other platforms. See Unix filesystem and man 7 hier. -- (talk) 21:53, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
One technique that often works is to run strings on the (binary of the) program in question. Often this will reveal the hard-coded pathnames the program will use. (And you could narrow the search down with strings | grep / or something.)
Another (even more hard-core) technique is strace, which lets you snoop on all the system calls (and, in particular, all the file-opening calls) a running program is making. —Steve Summit (talk) 13:28, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I broke the Assume Good Faith option for myself[edit]

Moved to WP:VPT. Dismas|(talk) 13:41, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I see no result for "Geo-IP", why?[edit]

Geo-IP doesn´t work, is this user using an open proxy? --Poker chip (talk) 16:55, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

It works for me, giving the following results:
Provider: Globe Telecoms
Region: San Juan (PH)
This is similar to the info in a WHOIS [3].
I take it you're aware Geo-IP loads a Google Maps where it shows the results and this may happen after it loads an ad (and the site also seems a bit slow). Even so, in future, if you have problems try using a different geolocation service in case the one you're using is playing up, or simply lacks info for that particular IP for whatever reason. Note the absence of a result in any geolocation service is probably not an indication of an openproxy.
Nil Einne (talk) 17:14, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
I don´t understand this, but yes I see now a result on Geo-IP but I have first not having any result. I saw this "map" and the error message that there couldn´t be found any location to this ip" I have seen this error 2 times and I was interested why it isn´t showed. And I think it is an open proxy because he has edited in the german IP but he is located in a country miles away. --Poker chip (talk) 23:00, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Geolocation service do have problems, one reason why it's generally a good idea to check another service if you're having unexpected results. Not sure what you mean by "he has edited in the german IP". If you mean the editor has edited from a German IP before, well there are only about 9 edits for that IP, and there's nothing that looks like it will establish a clear link to another editor, so you may simply be mistaken about who this editor is. Even if you are correct, it's always possible that the editor went on holiday in the Philippines. (Although the IP seems to have edits over about 3 months, so it would likely have been a long holiday.) Note that someone from the Philippines editing the German wikipedia isn't a definite sign of an open proxy, there are definitely German speakers in the Philippines, including German tourists and ex-pats or migrants as well as locals who've learnt German. German may not be English, but it isn't exactly Njerep language either. Nil Einne (talk) 15:53, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2[edit]

What makes ssh time out?[edit]

When I log into an Ubuntu Linux box on my home network via ssh (from a Cygwin/Windows box nearby), I find that my sessions time out after some large amount of time (at least 30 minutes...maybe hours?) when I'm not actively using them. When I do the same thing to a Linux box on the other side of the planet run by my ISP, the timeout is MUCH shorter - so evidently this timeout can be adjusted on the server-side. How do I do that? SteveBaker (talk) 14:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

On my OSX system, man sshd_config returns in part:
This suggests to me that adding the lines

ClientAliveInterval 600 ClientAliveCountMax 3

to /etc/ssh/sshd_config (or someplace analogous)
should give you an timeout of 30 minutes. I have not tested this and know nothing of the vagaries of different sshd distributions, versions, etc. SemanticMantis (talk) 14:44, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
And, for cases where you are not the server administrator, you can configure the client to perform keepalives: ssh_config may include the ServerAliveInterval option:
It's up to you to decide if you want to configure the server, or the client, or both... there are usually no problems if keepalives are sent in both directions.
Nimur (talk) 15:01, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I've always wondered about this, but (slothful me) never delved into it to figure it out. The poor-man's solution I sometimes use is a little one-off ad-hoc keepalive pinger, invoked on the remote system:
while sleep 60; do echo 00 | unhex; done &
(where unhex is a little hex-to-binary filter that's been sitting in my personal bin directory since 1981 or so). This sends an invisible null character down the line once a minute, and usually works to keep the connection from timing out. (And even if I did know the magic sshd option to keep sessions from timing out, but the relevant machine wasn't under my control, I might still choose to use this user-level workaround.) —Steve Summit (talk) 13:17, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Mass rename / format files[edit]

Somehow, I've managed to remove the name and extension of over 400 photos and video files. So I'm stuck with files name 1,2,3 without the corresponding prefix to denote what type of file they actually are. Is there some way I can undo this or set them back up.

Trouble is, I can't really determine which files are videos or just pictures. -- (talk) 15:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Yikes! Realistically, it is probably faster for you to use a batch renaming tool to fix the bulk of the file names and extensions; then manually sort these files and rename the rest one-by-one, using guess-and-check to fix any incorrect file extensions. If you're really proficient, tools like file (command) can make educated guesses about file types... a script can wrap that command and automate your work... but I'd bet you'll spend more time learning to use it efficiently than manually modifying 400 files. If this is a problem that you never expect to need to solve again, the slow and arduous process of hand-correcting each file might really be the fastest way out.
If you are on Windows (... I make this presumption based on the new filenames you accidentally created!)... you might find the software mp3tag useful. Canonically, it is designed for batch modification and renaming of music files, but if I recall correctly, it will happily rename any other file type. It has a "regular expression"-style, wildcard-substitution file naming utility that will be more familiar to Windows users than many of the more general purpose, Unix-esque batch file manager softwares.
Nimur (talk) 17:07, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I suppose you did not wanted to say prefix, but suffix, in reference to the file extension. Scicurious (talk) 18:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Batch renaming is the easy part. Figuring out which are which is more challenging. Taking the harder part first:

The simplest solution that might work, depending on your OS settings and the original filetypes, would be to rename all of the files to be images (e.g. .jpg) then load thumbnails in your file explorer/viewer. If you're lucky, the ones that aren't images won't display properly. If they all display, try the same technique but with a video extension. If that works, skip the next paragraph.

If that didn't work, sort the files by size. This will cut down on some of the guesswork. If they were all taken with the same camera with the same settings, the size of the images will be relatively similar. In some cases, they'll might even be the same. Video files won't be so consistent, so look for patterns, moving those that look like video files out to a separate directory. You'll have to do some trial and error for videos that are about the size of images.

The renaming part. Operating under the assumption of Windows, open the directory with your presumed images. Holding CTRL-SHIFT, right click in an open part of the directory (i.e. don't click on a file) and select "Open command window here". In the console, you want the "rename" command. So if all of your files have no extension and you want them all to be .jpg, just type "rename *. *.jpg" (without quotes). If they're all jpg and you want them to be .mov, you would do "rename *.jpg *.mov". Good luck! — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:00, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

October 3[edit]

OGG recorder[edit]

Which free (gratuit preferably libre) software enables you to make OGG recordings on Windows 7?—Eat me, I'm an azuki (talk · contribs · email) 12:21, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Audacity would likely be a good choice for you.--Phil Holmes (talk) 12:53, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia tense[edit]

Please consider this example snippet from our article on Russ Jackson which I refer to in support of my broader question:

"Jackson is an Officer of the Order of Canada[8] and was awarded an honorary doctoral degree in law by McMaster University in 1989. He will be added to Canada's Walk of Fame in 2012.[9]"

Nobody has changed "will be" to "was" in these three years (and I don't know if the investiture happened - that would take human research). Should Wikipedia implement an automatic way of flagging instances like this, triggered by a parse of the grammar, prompting an update such as "[please update]" like the useful ones we have for "[citation needed]" and "[by whom?]"? Hayttom (talk) 16:21, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I've updated that particular instance. In fact, it was original research, predicting the future, so should never have been added with that exact phrasing. It would be interesting to know if anyone can write a script to find such predictions, and the more general sentences that need updating. We have some bot experts ... Dbfirs 16:51, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Please read the original edit adding this fact before throwing around phrases like "original research, predicting the future". A "prediction" in the form of an announcement from the Walk of Fame organizers seems like a reasonably reliable source to me. It might have been more exact to say "is to be" instead of "will be", but that's a minor point. -- (talk) 20:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that's the point I was making. The original edit should have been "It was announced that ...". Dbfirs 20:42, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Oh how thoroughly I hate the "on such-and-such-date it was announced that" sentence structure. I have seen articles with entire paragraphs made up of announce porn. Nobody cares when Mr. Passive announced something. Announcements are a clumsy sentence structure carrying non-notable and irrelevant information. (talk) 02:08, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Bookmarklet to insert preset text into browser text box[edit]

How could I create a Bookmarklet (in Chrome, but I imagine it would work elsewhere) that, upon clicking, would copy a particular block of text into whatever text box were selected? As an example I'm thinking about the Cluebot autoarchiving text one adds to a talk page to start auto-archiving. It's not exactly something to memorize and a bit of a hassle to look up every time -- but it's not really any more convenient to load up a text file or something, either. I'd like to be able to click in a particular spot and paste away from my browser (or, perhaps, click the bookmarklet and then specify where, if that's required). If cursor position is impossible because of the need to click the bookmarklet, maybe just insert it at the top of the text box? This may be better for Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), but the answer most likely does not require specificity to Wikipedia. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:54, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Have you tried saving a text file with the text you want, then cutting and pasting from there to wherever you need it ? I've done this before. StuRat (talk) 19:56, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Indeed. That's one of the approaches I mentioned above that I'm trying to improve upon. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:28, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Take a look at [4]. It looks like it can create exactly what you want. --jpgordon::==( o ) 21:30, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I did find that. It generated a long line of JS that, given my relatively poor knowledge of the language, isn't easily readable. When I searched for any mention of that site elsewhere, I found nothing, which did not fill me with confidence. I suppose I could use it as a starting point and figure out what it's actually doing along the way... — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:28, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Dell Latitude E5450[edit]

I recently started a new job and they supplied me with a Dell Latitude E5450. It has 8GB of memory. I'd like to find out if it can take 16GB. I found this spec sheet which says that models manufactured after Jan. 2015 can use 16GB. How do I find out if my laptop was manufactured after January? And most importantly if it can accommodate 16GB? Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 19:41, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

You might try running the download from, which is designed to give you info like that. StuRat (talk) 19:54, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
I had completely forgotten about Crucial! Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 03:07, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Google line chart variable Y max value[edit]

I have a lot of line charts on a website using Google's charts. Foe a few charts, I have between 3 and 6 columns of data. I don't want to see the first column. I want that to be the maximum Y value for that row of data. To make sense of this request... I have sales. I have a total sale quantity in the first column. I have categorized SOME of the sales in the other columns. So, the sum of the other columns is always less than the first column. I want to see a line chart where I see all by the total sales column as a percent of the total sales column. Right now, I think that I have to create a new data set with the percent of total for each category and graph that. I would prefer if there was some way to simply provide the API with one column of values as the total value and the others will automatically be shows as a percent of total. (talk) 21:50, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

October 4[edit]


September 30[edit]

What compound is it?[edit]

When reading Chemistry of the Elements (second edition) by N. N. Greenwood & A.Earnshaw, I saw a strange conpound in a chemical equation in page 692 - (SbF_3)_3SbF_5. What structure does it have? I went through the section of antimony's halides but found nothing about it. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 03:03, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

There is apparently a crystal structure for this, but I can't download it myself [5]. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
[6] gives a little more info & crystal unit cell dimensions, but not bond lengths or anything. I don't have journal access anymore but I'm sure someone else at WP:CHEM does, if you want to ask there. shoy (reactions) 13:56, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
This article does give atom coordinates in the unit cell, angles and bond lengths. There is also a Raman spectrum. The structure has SbF6 anions, and parallel chains of (Sb3F8)+. Le me know if you need more detail. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks to all of you. I've approximately known the struture already but I'm still confused about the bond angle of Sb-F-Sb in (Sb3F8+) - is it 180°? --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 12:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
That (Sb3F8+) is quite complicated. It forms a double strand wobbling up and down. There are two different angles subtended of the F atoms in the chain, 147.4° and 150.2°. On the Sb atoms the angles to two F atoms along the chain are 155.2° and 83.4° (the last where the wobble kinks in). Three Sb atoms outline a hexagon with the bottom bent in, with 3 F atoms making the other vertexes. Then each bent hexagon is linked by 2 F atoms to the left, and 2 to the right. An extra F atom is inside each hexagon and sticking out sideways from the chain on the other Sb atoms. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:03, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Record number of daily seizures[edit]

There's currently a campaign in Ohio to permit the use of marijuana in certain cases, and some of the proponents have been running atelevision advertisement featuring a mother who says that medical marijuana improved her daughter's epilepsy. According to the advertisement, the girl "was having over 1,000 seizures in a day" before they started using marijuana. I've tried and failed to find any even-close-to-reliable sources that attempt to guess the record highest number of seizures in a 24-hour period; the highest numbers I'm seeing are from news results, e.g. this one stating that a boy had approximately 100 per day. Does anyone know where I could find a reliable source that might attempt to identify the highest recorded number of seizures in a 24-hour period? Nyttend (talk) 03:26, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

PS, please note that no discussion of medical marijuana is intended or desired; I'm solely looking for information about epilepsy symptoms, not methods of relieving it. Nyttend (talk) 04:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Can't really help with that, but can add some thoughts to consider. Remember not all "seizures" are the same. Nor are they the same duration. Which is worse, 3 seizures that last a total of 2 minutes, or 1 seizure that lasts 3 minutes? Note also that Addyson Benton, the child featured in the commercial, isn't having grand mal seizures or tonic/clonic seizures. She has myoclonic epilepsy, which consist of muscle jerking without loss of consciousness. In terms of numbers, I suspect simple absence seizures (which manifest outwardly only as staring) can occur very frequently during the day without even being noticed.- Nunh-huh 06:16, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
There are a range of epileptic disorders and seizure types, as Nunh-huh indicates. If you include simple partial seizures (seizures restricted to one or a few parts of the body), the maximum will be much more: for an Epilepsia partialis continua study I saw, the selection criterium was: 10 seconds or less between seizures; that's at least 8640 per day (assuming they continue during sleep).
For severe disorders, the mortality will depend on the frequency and severity; children with more seizures die younger. So it's hard to come up with a maximum, it varies with type and with age.
Some of the generalized types with high frequencies:
  • West syndrome: has an onset between 3 and 12 months, with seizures peaking after 5 months. At it's peak, a child can have up to 30 clusters per day, with 20 to 150 seizures per cluster. 5% mortality at age 5 Source
  • Lennox–Gastaut syndrome: combination of a variety of seizures, including sometimes hundreds of tonic seizures at night, onset 2 to 8 years, prognosis poor.
  • Atypical benign partial epilepsy: (not really partial) onset 2.5 to 6 years, multiple types, hundreds per day.
  • Ohtahara syndrome: onset within first 3 months, tonic seizures, independent of sleep cycle, can be hundreds per day. 50% mortality at age 2, may transition in West S and later in Lennox G S.
  • Childhood absence epilepsy: as mentioned by Nunh-huh. can occur hundreds of times per day without others noticing.
Had a similar problem a while ago, when I came across idiopatic insomnia (child age onset, often at birth, persistent and life-long). One source writes that they included some of the worst forms of insomnia ever recorded in a sleep laboratory. But I couldn't find any source saying how much (or little) those people slept (not for lack of trying, my browser history now has 1027 searches and webpages containing the words "sleep" or "insomnia" ((+_+)) ). Found only one notable case report: long-term (19 year) opiate therapy for a woman who slept 0 to 3 hours nightly before treatment. Ssscienccce (talk) 10:26, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

This Watch[edit]

Can someone please tell me about this watch.These don't seem to be "hot digits", or are they? If not,what is the actual system. How it works? (talk) 03:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

That to me looks like a static prototype. i.e. those digits are molded and painted onto the band, it's not a "functional" watch. I'd need to see a video of the digits changing to convince me otherwise. I'm not an expert but I am somewhat familiar with LEDs and various displays, I've built LED cubes and clocks from VFDs and Nixie tubes amongst other things. Vespine (talk) 05:43, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Ok, i take that back, it's just a terrible photo which has probably been "retouched". I did a reverse image search to find a supplier and given the price AND the fact you have to press a button to display the time (as opposed to "on all the time") these are almost certainly just regular hot digits. The reason it looks fake is probably the digits don't photograph well so they've been "shopped" in.Vespine (talk) 05:48, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Vespine, For the sake of the rest of us, as neither Googling nor searching on WP finds any results, what exactly are "hot digits"? Rojomoke (talk) 12:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Well, I have to admit I made a little bit of an assumption on my part too, but I expect the OP was just talking about regular old LED segment displays. I actually did a google image search for hot digit display and confirmation bias took me the rest of the way. I realize now that even though that gave me the result I was expecting, it wasn't for the right reason. Vespine (talk) 22:57, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Meaning of elemental mass[edit]

In an old German physics paper, the author used the term "Elementarmasse" (literally "elemental mass").

This term does not appear in any of the physics textbooks (English) I have.

The whole sentence translates as something like:

Here, K is the gas constant of an electron, T is the absolute temperature, ε is the elementary charge of an electron in electrostatic units, and μ its elemental mass and the i in electrostatic units, measured current per unit area.

What exactly is "elemental mass"? What is its standard value? (talk) 03:31, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

It would really help if you gave us more context, including the equation. Literal translation of German physics is a notorious problem, as I have previously remarked!
Going from the limited context we have, this is probably referring to the "elementary mass" - not "elemental." in English, we would typically say "rest mass." Contrast this to the reduced mass, the relativistic mass, or any of the various other masses we might care about. In this case, it would be the me constant, 9.1×10-31 kg, or, about 1/1800th of an atomic mass unit.
Nimur (talk) 04:50, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Nimur. The subject involves assuming the electrons have near zero speed, so there is no reason why the author had to indicate it was not under any sort of relativistic effect. I had thought that it should simply be the mass of an electron. But why not just simply say so? Other aspects of this paper had tricked me, so I thought I had better not assume too much. Unfortunately the formula makes no sense dimensionally, so I am looking for an error. (talk) 08:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Could it be the mass in Dalton (5.485799*10−4)? Ssscienccce (talk) 06:20, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Gravity and Hubble's constant[edit]

According to metric expansion of space, special relativity allows spacetime curvature to change at superluminal speed, meaning that space's expansion goes faster than speed of light. If this is so and if gravity cannot propagate faster than light, there should be regions in space unaffected by gravity. Yet it's typically stated that gravity has infinite range. How to reconcile that?

Also, does it mean that due to accelerating universe Hubble's constant technically isn't a constant value anymore and is changing? Brandmeistertalk 08:40, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

"Gravity has infinite range" and "gravity propagates at the speed of light" are not incompatible in theory, though they may be incompatible in reality. In the actual universe, it could be the case that certain objects will never experience one another's gravity due to constantly increasing distance. You may be interested in reading Cosmological horizon and hubble sphere. And you are correct, hubble's constant is not required to be constant. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:23, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
(EC) When people say that gravity (or electromagnetism) has infinite range, what they mean is that the force never "stops". A photon or a graviton/gravitational wave keeps propagating forever (a gluon, by contrast, will decay into a quark/antiquark pair if you stretch it too far, which is why the strong force does not have infinite range), regardless of what spacetime is doing around it. Smurrayinchester 09:24, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
"special relativity allows spacetime curvature to change at superluminal speed" isn't true, and I don't think the article says that. It's true that the rate of change in cosmological distance per unit cosmological time can be larger than c. But that's a different notion of speed, where c has no special role to begin with. (Other examples of that are closing velocity and the "superluminal scissors".) The special-relativistic rule that nothing can go faster than light (meaning that worldlines don't leave the light cone) is not violated in cosmology. I don't think it's accurate to describe a rapid increase of cosmological distance as a rapid change of curvature. Cosmological distance is not directly related to curvature, and the way it's defined is somewhat unphysical.
As far as we an tell, the universe is homogeneous: the big bang happened everywhere, and there are galaxies everywhere. So there needn't be any part of the universe that is unaffected by gravity. But it's true that in an exponentially expanding universe, local perturbations of matter will never be detectable beyond a certain distance, and in that sense you could say the range of gravity is limited. The cosmological constant, if it is really a constant of nature, sets a gravitational distance scale of ~18 billion light years that you could perhaps reasonably call "the range of gravity". But I can't remember hearing a physicist call it that.
Hubble's "constant" changes with time in any big-bang cosmology. It's normally written H(t), with Ho = H(tnow) being the current value (which will not detectably change for millions of years at least). H(t) was much higher in the past (it goes to infinity at the big bang singularity). In the exponentially expanding ΛCDM future, H(t) approaches a constant positive value. H is constant only in an exponentially expanding, exponentially shrinking, or static universe. -- BenRG (talk) 21:10, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
The limited range of gravity only prevents it from reaching all space if mass-energy can truly be created or destroyed. Otherwise the mass has always existed, from the time of the Big Bang; the response to changes in its position might merely be out of date, to be corrected later by gravity waves and such. But while once the conservation of mass-energy seemed like fundamental law, in these days of dark energy and tired light, I'm no longer nearly so clear on the concept. Wnt (talk) 15:55, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Dark energy doesn't contradict conservation of mass/energy. The basic idea is simply that the universe contains a field that exerts a repulsive effect. There isn't any energy being expended to cause this effect; it's just there. Similarly, the Earth doesn't "use up" energy to maintain its gravitational attraction, and a magnet doesn't "use up" energy to attract or repel things magnetically. For extra measure (and because it's really neat), consider the Casmir effect, or more generally vacuum energy. Disclaimer: I'm not a physicist, just an interested layman. -- (talk) 21:34, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Superconducting DC transformer[edit]

When I was searching for superconducting transformer I found this explanation: . Then, in the follow up 2, Mike W claims that a superconducting transformer can also use DC and AC instead of normal transformer that can only uses AC. Is this true? If this is true, will the equations for normal AC transformer apply? What happens if the primary winding is connected to the DC source without any load connected to the secondary? Will it short-circuit? (talk) 12:05, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

You can read this. Ruslik_Zero 20:24, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Domesticated but not by choice[edit]

Do cockroaches, rats and the like count as domesticated? I mean animals that live around humans and are dependable on us somehow. Is there a name for such niche? They are not really wild, but also not like my dog Simba.--Denidi (talk) 13:28, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

The live in amensalistic or commensalistic relations with humans. Domestication implies deliberate action by humans to derive benefit, which is not the case. Brandmeistertalk 13:51, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
(By "dependable" I assume you meant "dependent".) Note that cats and dogs likely started being domesticated in that way. Cats would hang around human grain stores to catch the mice they attracted, and thus be dependent on the humans, before they moved in with people. The people, noticing fewer mice and less missing and contaminated grain, let the cats stay. Dogs probably started as wolves hanging around the perimeter of human encampments to eat any hunting scraps left behind. Humans, noticing the value of the wolves making noise whenever a dangerous or huntable animal was nearby, similarly allowed them to stay. StuRat (talk) 13:58, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
No. They are not domesticated. But yes, there are terms for it. I actually mentioned it just recently for the spider ID request above. For organisms that usually live near or around human habitations, the term is synanthropy. For organisms which specifically prefer human habitations or animals which prefer humans as a food source (for instance some mosquitoes and parasites), the term is anthropophilia. -- OBSIDIANSOUL 14:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Then the spider is domesticated if I choose not to kill it so it captures more mosquitoes?? (talk) 18:18, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
No, domestication sensu stricto implies selective breeding. If you were to breed spiders selectively to look cute, and/or to not bite people, and/or to catch flies better than their wild-type ancestors, and/or to spin curtains for your window instead of a regular spider-webs; - then they would be domesticated. OTOH, the term domestication used in a broad sense may imply any stage of domestication process, which is continuous and spans many generations of the animal being domesticated. Dr Dima (talk) 18:38, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
@Dr Dima: Not to quibble too much, but selective breeding isn't exactly the same as animal husbandry. Killing spiders around the house vs. letting them live can in principle form a selective pressure. While we have certainly selectively bred dogs with extreme intention for certain traits over the past few centuries, the origin of the domestic dog is still disputed, with Origin_of_the_domestic_dog#Self_domestication currently leading among other theories. In that line of reasoning, a selective pressure came about wherein wolves that didn't fear humans had an adaptive benefit compared to those that did fear humans. The point being, that the domestication of the dog may well have not involved "selective breeding" in the strict sense, but rather a more general exertion of human-derived selective pressure. I don't want to say that tolerating spiders is "domestication" per se, only to point out that there is serious room for debate in how these terms apply. OP may be interested in this Wired article [7] detailing changes in behavior and perhaps evolution of animal species due to unintentional effects of human commensalism/synantrhopy. I can find more scholarly refs on that topic upon request :) SemanticMantis (talk) 22:46, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Most definitions of domestication involve taming the animal [8] [9]. Richerman (talk) 01:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Here are some "cute" spiders, if anybody was wondering how that works. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:07, October 1, 2015 (UTC)
Salticids are not only cute, they're smart too. They're some of my favorite animals. That said, that "family portrait"? I hate to break it to you, but... that's not her baby. And she's not carrying it, she's um... :[ -- OBSIDIANSOUL 08:57, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
what if we catch flies and put them in spider's web so that it doesn't have to hunt? (talk) 13:54, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Keeping something around the house as a "pet" of sorts, or as something with a practical use, is not necessarily the same thing as domestication. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:47, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

A Simple Amplifier[edit]

Can one build a simple amplifier using a transistor, microphone, and small-speaker? (talk) 14:11, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Wouldn't you need a power source ? (An unpowered megaphone doesn't actually amplify sound overall, it just concentrates it in one direction.) StuRat (talk) 14:16, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Well, not exactly. You'll need to add at least a resistor and a capacitor - possibly more depending on precisely how much amplification you need. If you google "one transistor amplifier" - you'll find a ton of information - including circuit diagrams and component values. SteveBaker (talk) 14:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
If you want to actually amplify the sound wave power -- that is, to get more sound energy per unit time from your speaker than the sound energy per unit time arriving at your microphone --then you will certainly need a power source other than the sound itself. If, on the other hand, you want to simply demonstrate the operation of an amplifier circuit, without actually increasing the sound power, then you can use your microphone as a power source. Many microphones do not require an electric power source; rather, they convert the sound power to electric power by inductive, piezoelectiric, etc. mechanisms. Most loudspeakers, too, can work both ways - convert electric power to sound power when used as speakers, or sound power to electric power when used as microphones. However, you can never get more sound energy out than the sound energy that goes in, unless you use some additional source of energy. If you can clarify your question, we can give you a more specific answer. Dr Dima (talk) 19:14, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Assuming you have connected a power supply, a single transistor stage as posed in the question will not work until the transistor is biased on so that it conducts current. Transistors are always off until biased on. The normal (and easiest) way to bias the transistor on is with a single resistor, as SteveBaker said above, and it should be connected from power source to the transistor's base. There also needs to be an audio transformer connected in the transistor's collector circuit to transfer audio to the speaker, or a load resistor with large value capacitor to transfer audio while blocking DC from harming the speaker. If you use a carbon microphone (high output voltage), there will likely be enough signal to drive the transistor into producing some audio, which may be low level or distorted or both until you take some measures that may involve more components. Any other type of microphone will not produce enough audio. The short answer to the question, 'Can one build a simple amplifier using a transistor, microphone, and small-speaker?' is no, there are at least two other components needed and even then, the results may be very unsatisfactory. Akld guy (talk) 21:43, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Good old carbon microphone, wouldn't even need a transistor, simply put power, microphone and speaker in series. Like the first telephones. Or how about this: Sound-powered telephone, doesn't even need a power supply. Ssscienccce (talk) 14:26, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
OP: As others have remarked, you need at minimum a few resistors, a power source, and 2 capacitors. However, it is very doubtful that you get enough amplification for it to be usable. Your output depends on the microphone output and the transistor's beta (hFE). At most you'll get a weak signal when someone shouts in the microphone. I'm assuming that the micro is a little electret or capacitor microphone: the energy it can pick up from the sound waves is directly proportional to the surface area, so the electric signal it produces is also small (unless they have a pre-amplifier built-in, that's possible). A (small) speaker has a much larger surface area and can also work as a microphone, so if you have a second speaker, you could use it as microphone to increase the output. Even then, output would suck. This page may provide some tips if you want to try. With a few components more you get acceptable quality: A simple two transistor amplifier Or here: fig 13 or 27. Ssscienccce (talk) 14:26, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Use a amplifier in an integrated circuit. This device needs additionan basic passive components only. If your need is a problem of energy consumption, temperature, needed space or weight, look for a class-D or class-T amplifier. Quality would not be an issue using this. Reliability is the price of passive components and manufacturing quality. Amplifiests with a single transistor have a high lost, are not really linear, and are used as preamplifiers only. --Hans Haase (有问题吗) 10:37, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

October 1[edit]

Why is there foaming at the mouth while epilepsy attack?[edit]

One of the symptoms of epilepsy is foaming at the mouth. When looking at around of the mouth it's possible to see foaming. My question is what is the physiological process or process that cause it and how is this foaming created? (I heard that the salivary gland secrete saliva, but it doesn't explain the form of the foaming) 02:31, 1 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

It really is just saliva. In epileptic seizes, the salivary glands produce more saliva than normal (Hypersalivation). And since you're not swallowing normally, the majority of it stays in the mouth. Coupled with rapid erratic breathing that churns the saliva, the result is frothy saliva.-- OBSIDIANSOUL 03:33, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Just to be pedantic, 'epilepsy' is a blanket term for a wide range of pathological conditions characterised by abnormal electrical activity in the brain which results in different sorts of seizures which may vary from blank staring to a tonic-clonic seizure (formerly called 'grand mal' siezure). The questioner seems to be asking about the latter. Foaming at the mouth only occurs in some people undergoing a tonic-clonic seizure and is never considered a sign of epilepsy but as a result of the clenching of the teeth, tightening of the facial muscles, including the lips, and rapid breathing. There are several other important signs to be considered when verifying a diagnosis of 'epilepsy'. Further pedantry warning - a medical sign is something seen or measured objectively by a physician or carer, a symptom is something felt or experienced by the patient. Thus a bump on the head is a sign but a headache is a symptom. Sadly these terms are tending to become synonymous and lose their grammatical value. (Steps down from soap box.) Richard Avery (talk) 07:00, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Foamy saliva is also a hallmark of rabies, due to the same mechanisms. You might find the foam article interesting. -- (talk) 18:22, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Richard, can you give a source for this thing? "but as a result of the clenching of the teeth, tightening of the facial muscles, including the lips, and rapid breathing.". Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:05, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Is Bufferin identical to aspirin?[edit]

A search for an article about the pain reliever Bufferin, seen in a 1950's TV show commercial at 29:03 redirects to Aspirin. But old TV commercials for Bufferin distinguished the two , and said that aspirin added its acidity to the natural stomach acid to produce excess acid, while Bufferin prevented this because it included the ingredient "di-alminate", which buffered the acidity of the aspirin, When I search on the internet for "di-alminate" I only find "diy laminate" about flooring I could install myself. So the topic question naturally arises. Did the buffering benefit of "di-alminate" only arise in the advertising agencies of Madison Avenue? Does Wikipedia only allow articles about the principal ingredient of medical combination drugs, as opposed to an article about Bufferin with 322,000 Google results, whether it is a panacea or a big hoax? The Physicians Desk Reference online version says Bufferin is aspirin buffered with calcium carbonate, magnesium carbonate,and magnesium oxide. Is there any policy or guideline which says there cannot be an article conveying this information. even if there is no medical benefit compared to plain aspirin? It may well satisfy [WP:N] via book/magazine coverage such as [10] In 1959 Anacin and Bufferin accounted for 50% of the OTC pain reliever market per [11]. See also [12] which has significant negative coverage. Edison (talk) 03:49, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Bufferin is mentioned in the section Aspirin#Gastrointestinal. Maybe the redirect should be directly to that section. Rojomoke (talk) 04:17, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
I guessed "alminate" was "aluminate" and dredged up [13]. Apparently there were respectable claims that it worked at the time - though I didn't actually look into them. (Remember that pharmaceutical companies fund research studies, and they oddly seem to get positive results much of the time, and they only have to keep the preponderance of positive results going until the patent expires, at which point having their product debunked, ideally banned, becomes a good thing, to stop it from competing with the next one. This is the way it always has been) Wnt (talk) 07:52, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
To be fair, a positive result due to funding bias is virtually indistinguishable from one caused by publication bias. Makes plausible deniability that much easier. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:55, October 1, 2015 (UTC)
I don't think it warrants its own article as there is not that much to say about it, so I've changed the redirect to go to Aspirin#Gastrointestinal as suggested above. Richerman (talk) 09:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
So if Bufferin also had a version with ibuprofin or acetominaphin in addition to the "aspirin plus other ingredients" version like Anacin and Anadin ten it could have an article discussing its marketing and other history like those painkillers? I'm puzzled why a major advertisor/consumer product only is supposed to get a passing reference in Wikipedia. Are there other OTC painkillers with their own articles, which are aspirin/ibuprofin/acetominaphin plus dubious ingredients? Edison (talk) 12:46, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
WP:BOLD! ;-) Ssscienccce (talk) 14:47, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Metal detectors and film[edit]

If I take photography film through an airport metal detector, will it hurt the film? What about one of those body scan machines-- (talk) 13:25, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

The canonical answer has always been "yes" - broadly speaking, these types of machines produce X-ray radiation, which damages photographic film. Here's a technical bulletin from Kodak, formerly the world's largest manufacturer for camera film: Baggage X-ray Scanning Effects on Film (2003), with pictures!
But... let's take this apart a little farther. That publication was more than a decade ago. And, the question has asked about "metal detectors" and "full body scanners." In the last fifteen years, airport scanning technologies have changed pretty dramatically.
Metal detectors work by a totally different physical process - they emit low frequency radio signals, and/or they detect a change in antenna impedance due to electromagnetic induction. It's probably safe to say those will never damage photographic film.
Full body scanners come in a variety of types: there are backscatter X-ray machines and there are full body scanners that operate in the microwave/millimeter-wave regime. If you travel in America, you are more probably going to be exposed to microwave than to X-ray (because millimeter-wave is safer and it produces a better image). See, for example, TSA's Advanced Imaging screening video. In a handful of other countries, you as a human might actually be subjected to X-ray radiation at an airport screening checkpoint. Microwave scanners will not affect film; but TSA checkpoints will not allow you to carry your film in the scanner anyway.
Finally, even baggage-scanning X-ray devices have improved a lot in the last decades. Today, most airport machines advise "no damage" to films graded at ISO-800 or slower. This is because new machines use lower intensity x-ray to obtain the same image quality.
Nimur (talk) 14:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
While not disagreeing with Nimur, remember that on a long trip (and return) the film might be taken through detectors a number of times and the, individually minor, effects will be cumulative. Photographers used to be advised to ask for hand searches to avoid irradiating their film, but in today's World of Security Theatre and more numerous, less customer-friendly security staff I understand this is usually futile. {The poster formerly known as — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:44, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
I fly England to Australia and back every year and I always put my film in a lead bag. Only once have they asked me to open it. The rest of the time they see the blob on the scanner, twiddle a knob and it changes colour on their screen. They know what it is and push it through. I've always found the scanner people to be very helpful, so when in doubt ask the item to be hand examined. TrogWoolley (talk) 15:47, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Silly answer I know because it is not answering the OP's question, but with a digital camera one can FTP all one's boring travel snaps back home before one even gets near to the airport. Cheaper too! Unless one is in say Antarctica (forget that continent – no decent restaurants and bars – no night life at all in the summer (err... maybe because there is no night) and no internet connection to keep in-touch with one's employees to make sure they still have noses to the grind stone whilst you're away). Yet, for most people, FTP is a breezes – and a lot less breezy as it can get in Antarctica. Also, if one uses the good old tradition film in say the Australian desert at high temperatures, the lower gamma or toe of the emulsion (the darker parts of the image) becomes grainy. That is why, when Lawrence of Arabia was filmed in Spain (don't ask) they stored the film in fridges. --Aspro (talk) 18:15, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
There are lots of other places in the world, and even in England, where an internet connection is impossible or difficult. Dbfirs 08:32, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Oh, come on! Name me a place at an international airport (which has scanners) but where there are no telecommunications. A telephone is all one needs to use a dial-up modem. FTP works down any telephone line (but just slower sometimes). Just include the necessary equipment along with one's sun-tan lotion, diarrhea and malaria medication. Of course, if Michael O'Leary of Ryanair decides to start landing some of his aircraft in the middle of Dartmoor, then I grant you, that his passengers may have a little problem. Gosh, I hope that O'Leary isn't reading this as he might decide to do it and end up frightning all the ponies. --Aspro (talk) 11:13, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Have you ever tried to upload pictures using a dial-up modem? I have, and had to give up in despair! Dbfirs 11:23, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Also note that uploading the 100-odd Gigs of photos I took on a recent holiday might take quite a while using FTP in an airport. Rather longer than the wait for the plane, so you'd miss it.--Phil Holmes (talk) 11:44, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
I take it that you are talking about the Baud rates of some years ago. Telecoms have upgraded their systems (we are now more than half way through 2015). Name a place where an inter-national air-ports don't have satellite or fiber-optics connection. (with exception places like the Antarctic)? To-day, one can be on top of mount Everest or in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and still phone home. [14]. Penguins (quite wisely IMO) don't want to use the W.W.W. So there is no commercial reason to provide such a service to them (and telecoms satellites don't orbit that far south away). Yet, for humans, they come across a scanner or x-ray machine only, in areas where there is a point in having a scanner or x-ray machine. Those areas have 21st Century connectivity. Unless, of course, you can point out an exception. When one goes on vocation, does one not take any necessary prophylactic medication in case it is not available locally? Same with information technology. Otherwise, one may not stray further afield than a Holiday Inn. Period. I sympathize (really for reasons, too long to go into) with Phil Holmes who was uploading Gigs. Plan a head. Then go to sleep whilst it uploads. Yet it sounds like he was using digital. Post copies off in a jiffy bag (remember - create back-ups), (sorry to disillusion you but isn't that what your laptop is for -creating back-ups. If you what to writ a travel log, then use a pencil and paper and and NO rubber eraser. Not the laptop. One's first impression are often the best and one does not want to erase them). After all, one doesn't want to lose those precious photos, so that one get home, one can't bore the pants off friends and neighbors buy showing them your amassing vacation snaps. Here's one of me standing next to a penguin. Oh, and you can't miss this of me and Ethel standing next to a penguin and this one of Ethel shacking hands with a penguin - shot that myself without using the camera's Auto function; yes really, I choose 250 at f 4 an an ISO which I've forgotten. All the other photos came out under exposed on Auto. Oh, and look here`! -Another photo of a millions and millions of penguins. Next year we are going to Australia and I can't wait to show you my photos of all the lamas and hippopotamuses out there. - Etc.--Aspro (talk) 15:13, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Ask an Australian[edit]

So how do the yabbies get into the dam in the first place? It's not connected to any waterways. SpinningSpark 21:57, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Stocked by the farmer eg Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:44, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Well the ones in the dam at the place I visited in the Adelaide Hills were certainly not put there by the residents, they hated them. They were liable to painfully nip toes when we went swimming in the dam as you walked through the mud. But it was a Victorian era cottage, so maybe they were put there a long time ago. SpinningSpark 22:49, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
The actual dam in question
For the non-antipodians, a yabby is also known as a crayfish or crawdad. This paper [15] details an American species invasive in Portugal, but the general principles of their aggressive colonization probably apply to species moved around AU as well. This [16] talks about how anglers can easily spread crayfish through use as bait, another possibility in AU. This paper [17] discusses the dispersal of crayfish by water birds, i.e. ectozoochory (our article is focused on plants, but many animals, particularly freshwater critters that inhabit ephemeral pools can disperse via zoochory). SemanticMantis (talk) 01:33, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Apologies for not linking the terms right away, but it helped to limit initial responses to those who actually knew the answer rather than those who wanted to speculate. Here is a picture of the actual dam in question. It is on top of a hill and there is no running water anywhere for miles. I would surmise that it is definitely man-made. SpinningSpark 15:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Well I knew what a yabby was but I'll admit I would not have called that a dam, it would be a pond in AmEng. Anyway, I don't think we can say for certain without additional historical info, but my scholarly refs above suggest that arrival by bird is a possibility, even if there had been no intentional stocking or dispersal via human anglers. I'm not an Australian but I am a biologist, and know a few things about Biological_dispersal. Hope the refs help even if they are not AU specific; looks like a lovely place :) SemanticMantis (talk) 16:08, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
In the south of Western Australia a similar native animal is endemic; called the Jilgie. It was a traditional food source for certain of the original inhabitants. Dolphin (t) 00:11, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Formation of diverse particles[edit]

I don't completely get particle production. Does mass–energy equivalence explain why the converted energy of one particle produces the mass of another particle? How did quarks alone in hadron epoch formed diverse baryons simply by binding together? Why two massless and chargless photons can produce a charged electron and positron but not themselves? An apple can't produce bananas and if you collide two apples you either get chunks of the same apples or one bigger apple, but not bananas. Yet for some reason quarks produced a set of baryons, including protons and neutrons. -- (talk) 22:25, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Baryons are made of quarks. When you combine three quarks to get a proton or neutron, you don't have to put in extra energy to make the proton or neutron; you get out extra energy because the bound state is more stable. The quarks are still there afterward, just bound together. This is similar to how you get out extra energy by combining together several atoms to make a molecule. It's a different case when you're talking about photons colliding to make an electron-positron pair. Then you're really getting something different. There's no law of conservation of photons or law of conservation of electrons; there are various conserved quantum numbers, but it's only the total that's conserved. There are lots of collections of particles with different properties that could add up to the same totals (such as zero total charge in this case), so there are lots of possible end states for a collision. --Amble (talk) 22:50, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Reading your response regarding the lack of conservation of electrons, I was reminded of the idea of the One-electron_universe. Not especially relevant to the question, but OP may find it interesting just the same. SemanticMantis (talk) 01:23, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Our pages on this are at quark, Color confinement, Pair production, and Hadronization (binding together of quarks). Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
The particles are probably best thought of as different types of motion of a single quantum field. They "turn into each other" because there's not much difference between them in the first place. Quarks and hadrons are a bad example, though, because hadrons are not distinct particles from quarks, as Amble already said.
(I disagree with what Amble said about combining three quarks to get a proton or neutron. You can't do that because isolated quarks don't exist: they are always bound to other quarks from the moment they come into existence. The actual origin of protons and neutrons in the early universe was more like a single "giant hadron" (a quark-gluon plasma) splitting into small pieces.)
Two photons can produce two photons: it's called photon-photon scattering.
I suppose that you could collide two apples and end up with two bananas, but the probability of it is very low (akin to a tornado in a junkyard assembling a 747). -- BenRG (talk) 04:45, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
From what I read, it's not that "there's not much difference between them in the first place". Particles are distinguished by mass, charge, spin, etc and are treated separately. How on earth two photons with zero mass and zero charge produce two new particles with mass and charge? 0+0=0, but not 1 or 2. Per pair production, the photon must be near an atomic nucleus in order to satisfy conservation of momentum, so an electron-positron pair producing in free space cannot occur. It smells like mass–energy equivalence is either imprecise or flawed in that it seems to allow an electron-positron pair producing in free space, but this can't happen. At the same time the mass–energy equivalence seems to cheat by saying yes, photon's energy can be converted to mass, but only in the presence of atomic nucleus. Brandmeistertalk 13:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Charge is conserved, so a photon produces a positron (+1) and an electron (-1). 0+0=(+1)+(-1).
Mass and energy are equivalent, so a photon with energy x(c^2) produces particles of mass x-y, with energy y(c^2). x(c^2)=(x-y)(c^2)+y(c^2). At no point are you getting something from nothing. Photons have zero mass, but mass and energy are interchangable. Something else is required to ensure that momentum is conserved, but it doesn't have to be an atomic nucleus - provided there is another particle to dump some momentum onto, pair production can occur. Mass-energy equivalence doesn't pretend to be the whole picture - it says that if you can convert mass to energy, then this is the equivalent relationship, but does not provide constraints on when and how this can occur. Other rules, such as conservation of charge, momentum, spin, etc. provide those constraints. MChesterMC (talk) 14:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
photon ↔ electron + positron can't happen in free space because of energy-momentum conservation. A photon's energy-momentum vector is inclined at 45° to vertical up, and can have any length. An electron or positron's energy-momentum vector is inclined at less than 45° to vertical up (it also has to lie on the mass shell but that doesn't matter here). The sum of two vectors inclined at less than 45° is also inclined at less than 45°, so it can't equal the energy-momentum of a photon. But photon + photon ↔ electron + positron can happen because the sum of two vectors inclined at 45° (in different directions) can be any vector inclined at less than 45°.
Pair production near a nucleus is really photon + nucleus → electron + positron + nucleus. -- BenRG (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
@BenRG: Sure, the quarks aren't isolated before you make a hadron out of them, but I take asymptotically free to be a good enough approximation for purposes of the OP's question.
Someone should probably also point the OP to the totalitarian principle, which says that every outcome you can imagine happens some of the time, unless it violates one of the conservation laws. --Amble (talk) 22:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Is there any evidence that there has ever been a free quark, in the sense of a quark separated from all other quarks? (I understand they can be free of any specific other quark in a quark-gluon plasma, but they are still always near other quarks, which is what "shields" them, isn't it? There's no one-quark quark-gluon plasma, ever, right?) Wnt (talk) 16:36, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
I think a quark has never been free in that sense. Amble is talking about a different kind of freedom, namely the fact that quarks move more or less freely within a strong-force "bag". Quarks are free in that sense in a quark-gluon plasma, but also free in that sense in a proton, but they'd also be said to be bound in the proton, so the terminology isn't great. At any rate, I may be wrong but I don't think quarks in the plasma grouped together in threes to make baryons; I think the big QGP bag broke into smaller (color-neutral) bags like water breaking into droplets. Maybe they are different descriptions of the same thing. -- BenRG (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2[edit]

Overcooked food[edit]

Is there a Wikipedia article about overcooking? I could not seem to find it when I want to know what happens when food turns black (and any health risk from consumption). (talk) 06:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I found these: Heterocyclic amine formation in meat (for meat) and Acrylamide (for starchy foods). Which seem to be what you're looking for.-- OBSIDIANSOUL 06:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
The browning (and sometimes blackening) of both breads and meats takes place via the Maillard_reaction. SemanticMantis (talk) 14:06, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Caramelization is the other of the two major browning reactions related to cooking. Well, there's also the extreme of charring and combustion I guess. DMacks (talk) 21:19, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Precipitation in US forecasts stated in inches[edit]

When the weather reporter says "We're going to get 1" of rain on Thursday," does the meteorologist community have a standard of what that means, like 1" in a graduated cylinder of defined cross-sectional area? (talk) 14:17, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

See Rain gauge. According to our article, the National Weather Service uses "a funnel emptying into a graduated cylinder, 2 cm in diameter, which fits inside a larger container which is 20 cm in diameter and 50 cm tall." Tevildo (talk) 14:21, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Exterior tipping bucket.JPG
(ec) Yes. But if you think about it, it doesn't really matter what the cross-sectional area of the container is - the larger it is, the more water is required to fill it up to 1" - but the larger it is, the more raindrops you're in the end, it all cancels out and the actual cross-sectional area doesn't matter...only the depth of the water at the end.
In practice, they use a wide funnel arrangement to capture the raindrops over a large area (see Rain gauge) - which avoids errors due to sheer luck (because the raindrops arrive randomly) - and then they funnel the water into a tall, narrow vessel for measurement. This allows them to measure the depth of the water to greater precision - and also avoids having a large surface area that the captured water might evaporate from and mess up the reading. But the calculation involves the cross-sectional area of the funnel divided by the cross-sectional area of the narrow vessel, multiplied by the depth of rain measured in that narrow vessel. That gives you the depth of water you WOULD have gotten if you'd just had a perfectly cylindrical collector.
So, essentially, you're right. "Three inches of rain" means that if you put a bucket out in the open in your back yard, then after the rainstorm has passed, it would have a three inch depth of water inside it. If you look at the depth of water in your swimming pool - that too would go up three inches. SteveBaker (talk) 14:32, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Exactly! Today, precipitation is usually measured using an Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS). The Tipping Bucket Rain Gauge is very accurate when measuring rainfall; but accumulations of other precipitation (like sleet, snow, hail, and so on) can introduce errors that are still often measured by a human observer. Nimur (talk) 14:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Actually, not quite right - If you left a bucket out in the rain it would have more than three inches in it after the rainstorm passed as buckets are wider at the top than they are are the bottom. Richerman (talk) 15:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Unless it's a straight sided bucket of course. Alansplodge (talk) 15:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Naa - that's a paint can. And it won't collect any rain as it's got a lid on.  :-) Richerman (talk) 18:45, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
"Plastic pail" actually. Alansplodge (talk) 22:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Ah but! - it's got a lip on the top that makes it slightly smaller than the bottom, so it still wouldn't be accurate :-) On a side note - there's a long discussion here as to whether a bucket and a pail are the same thing. Richerman (talk) 10:38, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
One would have to remove the lid to see if the lip actually reduces the circumference of the aperture, but I take your point. The product is on sale in New Zealand, where they sometimes have a quaint turn of phrase. Alansplodge (talk) 22:30, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

what are the current impediments in expanding the mandatory vaccine panels to include more vaccines[edit]

requesting exhaustive replies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahfuzur rahman shourov (talkcontribs) 16:44, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Wow! That almost sounds like an essay prompt for a homework question! Can you elaborate on what you're looking for? Nimur (talk) 16:47, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
The answer to your question is going to vary significantly depending on the context. What country are you referring to? Which group(s) of people within that country? What do you mean by "mandatory"? Deli nk (talk) 16:59, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@Nimur:that is no excuse for not giving reply to a question on RD which does not violate rules.

It is very much a reason for not giving an answer. It states quite clearly at the top of the page "We don't do your homework for you..." SpinningSpark 15:11, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

@Deli nk:mandatory vaccine panels. around the world, various vaccines are applied mandatorily, no exemptions. question of mine is what are the existing impediments in expanding the panels? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahfuzur rahman shourov (talkcontribs)

This isn't really a science question, but just off the top of my head: To begin with, mandatory vaccination is a per capita tax that hits the poor very hard, unless government makes the vaccines free. This is especially true when physicians, as is their wont, make it as troublesome and expensive as reasonably achievable to get the vaccinations done. Between the doctor's fees and the need of a parent to take off work every time a vaccination is scheduled, there can be social pushback. Also, even very young infants can feel substantial pain from shots, [18] and parents don't like that either. Additionally of course there is anti-vaccination paranoia, mostly unjustified but there's very rare Guillain-Barre, and can you ever really rule out the chance al Qaida has a man in QC? And of course, all the worst diseases for which vaccines are easily made are already covered - new ones will either be a difficult new vaccine (like HIV) or some shot that is fairly unlikely to be needed in a certain area (like Hepatitis A). Wnt (talk) 22:28, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

push-pull stage+unipolar supply[edit]

hello, in this circuit here this (fig. b), the speaker is coupled to the output stage using a capacitor. The text says that this is in order to prevent DC flowing through the load, i.e. it forms a high-pass together with the speaker and the transistors.
In another text (a book) which makes the same point (capacitor required in case of unipolar supply) it says the capacitor is there to store energy for the half-period when the top transistor is in cut-off and the bottom transistor conducts. Because then, the load is connected with both poles to ground and the battery cannot contribute to powering it. Which is correct, or is it two ways of saying the same thing? Thanks in advance, Asmrulz (talk) 17:45, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

A capacitor isolates the DC voltage (potential). A capacitor also store energy (power). Voltage (potential) and energy (power) are related but not the same thing. The output from a real amplifier may not match the speaker's impedance so a capacitor is required. Also notice that in a amplifier has a minus voltage rail. Although a speaker has impedance it also has conductance (and inductance) and would drain and mess up the signal between the two driving transistors. Which I think the main point of the capacitor. I'm sure an other editor will pop up to give even a clearer explanation to mine.--Aspro (talk) 18:28, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
They are both more or less correct, it's true that the capacitor prevents DC current through the load, but the second text explains what happens and the reason why it's needed better than the first. The mean voltage over the capacitor will become UB/2 (assuming an input signal without DC component) very quickly, but suppose that power and input are turned on at the same moment, and the input signal first goes negative: during that first half period there will be no output at all because the capacitor hasn't charged yet. That follows logically from the second explanation, not from the first.
Also: preventing DC current through the load is not really a necessary requirement for an amplifier: in circuit A there will be DC current through the load when the input signal has a DC offset. So the first explanation doesn't really explain why the capacitor is necessary, imho. Ssscienccce (talk) 20:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

OP, you seem to understand why a capacitor is not needed in fig.a, but I'll explain it for others. In fig.a, it's intended that with no signal, the transistors should be biased on by the resistors so that the voltage at the midpoint with respect to the common supply terminal is zero. This means that there will be zero volts across the speaker. In practice, no matter how much care is taken in setting this quiescent condition, one transistor will conduct a fraction more than the other and there will be a small offset current flowing through the speaker. This effect may worsen over a long period of time as components age. Nevertheless, this is why a capacitor need not be fitted in fig.a; there is no need to block DC from appearing across the speaker providing care is taken in the setting up. In fig.b which uses a single polarity supply, the transistors are biased so that the voltage at their junction is half the supply voltage. There is therefore a need to fit the capacitor to prevent DC appearing across the speaker. DC across a speaker is highly undesirable; it causes the speaker cone to move to a position that is not its natural rest position, and can thus cause distorted audio reproduction. Both explanations cited are correct. The capacitor blocks DC while passing the audio signal. The speaker receives audio signal from the top transistor via the capacitor when the polarity of the input signal causes that transistor to turn on and the bottom one to turn off. When the input signal reverses so that the roles are reversed, the stored energy in the capacitor conducts via the lower transistor and causes audio current to flow through the speaker. Thus on each half cycle of input signal, the speaker gets audio via one or other of the transistors. Akld guy (talk) 21:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I should point out also that in fig.a, it's rather fortuitous that a capacitor is not needed. If the biasing is set up correctly in the way I described, there is no voltage at the speaker terminal, and it just so happens that the only type of capacitor suitable at that position would be one that has high capacitance. The only type with adequate capacitance is the electrolytic capacitor, which absolutely requires a polarizing DC voltage in order to function. Such a capacitor would be used in fig.b. Akld guy (talk) 22:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Note : 'it's rather fortuitous that a capacitor is not needed' the OP needs to realize that these are examples of 'perfect' circuits to explain the principle. As mentioned above, it is difficult in practice to get two perfectly matched transistors that doesn't need a capacitor. So in a practical circuit (in say an amplifier that one would buy) a would include a capacitor to ensure it worked as advertised. Yet in b a capacitor is absolutely essential for the perfect circuit to work. I don't know if we have baffled the OP with science here or whether we have helped. So, in short: the two diagrams are just explaining the principles in perfect circuits and both explinations are correct in the right context.--Aspro (talk) 11:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
you have, thanks everyone Asmrulz (talk) 17:23, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
@Aspro: You seem to have missed the point about the capacitor in fig.a, which is not simply a diagram for illustration. It's an actual practical circuit. The only capacitor suitable in loudspeaker-driving circuits is the electrolytic capacitor since it is the only type that comes in large enough capacitance versions to drive a low impedance such as the speaker. The electrolytic capacitor by its nature requires a polarizing voltage, which shouldn't exist in fig.a at the point where it would be inserted since the aim is to carefully set the biasing of each transistor (with each one's base resistor) so that the DC output voltage is zero. No capacitor need be fitted, which is just as well since no practicable one can be fitted anyway due to lack of polarizing voltage. Akld guy (talk) 23:24, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

October 3[edit]

Does this Swiffer WetJet refill[19] contain polyacrylates?[edit]

I asked a question above, Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science#Using_disposable_diapers_as_paper_towels, and Jayron helpfully pointed me to exactly what I need. Now I just need some reliable sources to confirm that this refill [20] does indeed contain polyacrylates before going out and buying it. 731Butai (talk) 04:56, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Foreign common names of new species[edit]

Who typically gives foreign-language (non-Latin) common names of newly described species of animals and plants (excluding literal translations)? -- (talk) 09:16, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're going for, but the answer might be "nobody". Not every species described has a common name at all, let along one for every language. Many only have their Latin binomial nomenclature. Consider, for example, dinosaurs, which are typically only known by their Latin name - and the general populace usually only uses the Genus. (talk) 13:09, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
By new species I mean not only recent ones, but those described back in 1700s, 1800s and 1990s when they were new. (talk) 16:10, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

does sugar convert into body fat[edit]

linking to process if answer is affirmative would be nice bonus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahfuzur rahman shourov (talkcontribs) 15:48, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Homo sapiens and other Homo's had to live thorough the lean time of the year when food was short. Any carbohydrates like sugars needed to be turned into to fat to provided a energy source during the lean times. The paleolithic diet had little energy rich foods, so any sugars got converted into fat. Today, we have too much sugar, carbohydrates and fats, yet our bodies keep turning it to fat, The western populations are becoming morbidly obese now as there are no longer any lean times to burn off that fat. So we get fatter, fatter and fatter and need triply bypass surgery --Aspro (talk) 16:13, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

These metabolic processes make up much of what is called a "biochemistry" course, but I think you can make some sense of them.

Glycolysis converts glucose to pyruvate. Glucose is a simple sugar found in grapes and a few things like that; usually it has to be converted from other sugars like sucrose - I can go into that more if you want, but it's not a central issue. Anyway, glucose is the body's version of "sugar", as in blood sugar etc., and that's where it starts. For some reason our treatment (and others) of glycolysis doesn't go all the way to acetyl CoA - to get that last pyruvate into acetyl-CoA step in we need to consider pyruvate dehydrogenase separately. That enzyme is tripped by insulin, which tells the body it has taken in carbohydrate food and should do something with it. The acetyl-CoA can go to energy via the citric acid cycle, but since we're talking fat here we want lipogenesis instead. It's a biochemical (and behavioral) crossroads. Lipogenesis should explain the rest of what you want. Shout out if you run into trouble. Wnt (talk) 16:27, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

And when the body gets more carbohydrate foods than it knows what to to with (in a modern diet), the insulin feed-back system brakes down... But no fear, modern science is here. Quacks Doctors can proscribe expensive drugs to enable one to carry on eating a bad diet for the rest of the very short life one has left on our (or your) 21st Century diet. The quacks MD's can just bury or cremate their mistakes when it comes to treating patients with obesity.--Aspro (talk) 17:07, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
I think you're getting off topic. Everyone has fat (well, except maybe Lizzie Velasquez) and everyone converts extra carbs to fat now and then. The health record of obesity is not so bad compared to cancerettes, artificial fats, and maybe some other fine upstanding industries we don't know about yet. Wnt (talk) 22:16, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
MDs generally treat diseases, there are dietitians (nutritionists) who take care of one's diet. As prof. dr. Martijn B. Katan said, generally MDs don't know much about nutrition (medicine and nutrition are different specialisms). Besides, as long as eating what you like remains a right, there is little what MDs and dietitians could do in order to change the obesity epidemic. There are commercial regulations which have reduced fats from many products, but they tasted worse, so producers have replaces fats with sugars. In general, if you eat more calories than you burn, you will store extra fat. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:21, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
We're still off topic, but the recent word seems to be that fat actually is not unhealthy to eat, provided it didn't come out of a chemical vat where vegetable oil was processed at hotter-than-oven temperatures over a platinum catalyst to make it look like imitation lard. Wnt (talk) 22:31, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Coming back to the question then. Yes sugars get turned into fat. I am very wary about linking to a commercial web site but this one has it right. Read and enjoy. [21]--Aspro (talk) 23:03, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Mass–energy equivalence on macro scale[edit]

Is it true that mass–energy equivalence only works on micro scale, but not macro scale, when, for example, you cannot directly convert your own energy into something tangible with mass? I mean conversion of energy to mass only, not backwards as in the case of atomic bombs, etc. (talk) 17:22, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Mass-energy equivalence means that mass and energy are the same thing; it is two words with one meaning, not different things you can convert between. People sometimes use the words narrowly to mean things you might be able to convert between, such as photons ("energy") and a mixture of matter and antimatter at rest ("mass"). I'm not sure what someone would mean by saying that equivalence/conversion wouldn't work on the macro scale. There's no size limitation. As a practical matter it's impossible to assemble a cup of hot Earl Grey tea from electrons and nucleons, much less from electricity, but that isn't the fault of mass-energy equivalence. -- BenRG (talk) 18:05, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Saying that they are "two words with one meaning" goes too far. Ice and steam are two words for forms of H2O, and conditions exist where they are indistinguishable, but that doesn't make them "words with the same meaning". -- (talk) 20:53, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
No, mass and energy really are the exact same thing. You may be thinking of matter versus energy. Someguy1221 (talk) 21:31, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Note that our technology is far more effective at converting mass into energy than energy into mass. Any nuclear reactor does the first, although antimatter far more efficiently converts into energy. StuRat (talk) 19:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes. But could you provide an example when energy is directly converted into something tangible? (talk) 20:52, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Any endothermic reaction (be it chemical or nuclear) uses energy (typically thermal or kinetic energy) to convert reactants of one mass to products of a higher mass. The difference may be undetectable, but this very much works on a macro level. Or rather, it's working on the level of individual atoms or molecules, but even in very large collections of them. Someguy1221 (talk) 21:31, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

List of equipments/machines that exerts 'outward air pressure' in order to fly/move[edit]

E.g., Helicoptor, aeroplane, they require 'inward air pressure' in order to move...excluding man made 'spaceships' and or 'rockets'. -- Space Ghost (talk) 19:17, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Helicopters and aeroplanes do not require "inward pressure". Rather, they work from a differential pressure across the aerofoil. SpinningSpark 19:22, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. I can't think of an airborne vehicle, other than a rocket, which doesn't use variable air pressure to move. A prop increases the pressure behind it and decreases the air pressure in front, for example. Even though used on spacecraft, an ion engine might be of interest, being quite a different way of achieving thrust. StuRat (talk) 19:44, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Definitionally, pressure is a physical property of a fluid that does not have a direction. There is no such thing as "inward" or "outward" direction of pressure. Pressure is isotropic. Quoting our article:
So, ... this question cannot be answered until we correct our OP's misunderstanding about the way pressure actually works. Can you rephrase what you meant?
Nimur (talk) 20:25, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes, people often use the term "pressure" when they really mean "pressure gradient" or the like. Usually the meaning is obvious from the context but in this case it's a not clear. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 20:44, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
I assume the OP didn't literally mean "inward pressure", since he used quotation marks. Planes and helicopters use air "sucked" inward, rockets don't, so that could be what he refers to (maybe something more like a paddle steamer than a ship with propeller?). In any case, there aren't many ways to fly, jetpacks are also a type of rocket, that leaves only balloons I think? Ssscienccce (talk) 02:17, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Strange beetle[edit]

I have just found a strange beetle... alive in oil! It was probably in there for 9 hours. How did it survive and what is it?Megaraptor12345 (talk) 19:41, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Either it must have been able to breath air (which insects generally do through their skin) or perhaps it was able to go dormant and then escape and start breathing again. We will need a pic to identify it. StuRat (talk) 19:46, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
How would I get a pic up? Megaraptor12345 (talk) 20:22, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
At the top of the page, on the left side, there's an "upload file" link. Once you upload the image file, you can list the file name here and we will be able to view it. (They will ask you if you have a license, if you took the pic yourself just say "this is my own work".) StuRat (talk) 22:16, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Do people who have more visible eye area really have bigger eyes?[edit]

My question relates to how some people who appear to have bigger eyes (like Mila Kunis) when facing directly at them, but when taking in factors such as protrusion of the supra-orbital notch, amount fat around epicanthis, skin fold are, eye socket volume; I wondered if there was an actual disparity between the actual eyes' volume compared from those who have "big eyes" (Mila Kunis) and those with "small eyes" (Clint Eastwood).

Mila Kunis Eyes

Clint Eatwood

Does this make sense? Clint Eastwood appears to have smaller eyes than Kunis, but when considering the factors above or others that alter the perception of eye size, can he actually have an eye size similar to Kunis? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:00, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

There's this study: "Variations in Eyeball Diameters of the Healthy Adults" (Bekerman et al., 2014). I quote: "The size of an emmetropic human adult eye is approximately 24.2 mm (transverse, horizontal) × 23.7 mm (sagittal, vertical) × 22.0–24.8 mm (axial, anteroposterior) with no significant difference between sexes and age groups. In the transverse diameter, the eyeball size may vary from 21 mm to 27 mm. Myopia and hypermetropia change the axial diameter significantly that can vary from 20 to 26 mm." Dunno about Kunis and Eastwood. There may be variation there, but it's also important to note that Eastwood is squinting and has heavier bone structure, being male. Those also affect perception of eye size relative to the face. -- OBSIDIANSOUL 23:08, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

why does the nasa needs intelligent persons ? (I mean with high Iq´s)[edit]

I have seen a video of the 20 most intelligent persons on earth, quiet everybody is working or was working for the Nasa. And I remember that this one guy in the big bang theory is also working for the Nasa. Why do they need this persons? Does an Astronaut / Kosmonaut has to be intelligent? Do I need an IQ over 150 to be able to drive the mars rover? or what exactly is done with this persons--Poker chip (talk) 20:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

In this context IQ is a bit misleading. In broad numbers: Only about one in twenty people can lead others (i.e. they are dominate), (think PHB). Only about one in twenty of those have both that and an intellectual capacity to see through and understand the real issues. Out of those there are only a few that also have the background knowledge in a field of science that NASA needs. That whittles the population of the US down to a few thousand. It is a privilege to work for NASA or JET so these organizations can choose the most able ( must be difficult when one's daughter bring home her long hired boyfriend for the first time: '”Umm. so I've told you that I sell second hand autos.. so what do you do?” “Oh shucks, I don't know even how to drive - I'm just a rocket scientist!”) Yet, these people by their very nature are just good at IQ tests. You can practice and improve your score. But whether that qualifies you to drive the Mars Rover is a different issue entirely. My IQ scores have always been high – but I don't think I have the right background to drive a Rover – I would probable end up with a traffic violation ticket on the very first day.--Aspro (talk) 21:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
NASA does not use IQ tests as any part of their application process for ordinary career tracks or for the astronaut selection process. Consider reading Careers @ NASA for an introduction to the opportunities they have available, and for the criteria they use. A degree in a science or engineering discipline from an accredited university is among the first requirements for the more competitive positions. A strong command of the English language, in its spoken and written form, is also a prerequisite. The astronaut corps is not presently open to new candidates and has not accepted new applications since c. 2012. The United States does not presently operate any spacecraft capable of launching new manned spaceflight missions, and NASA is not actively recruiting or training new astronauts. Perhaps this status may change in the future.
Nimur (talk) 21:56, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
See what I mean: “A strong command of the English language, in its spoken and written form, is also a prerequisite.” that alone would disbar me from driving a Cape Canaveral Segway even with my IQ --Aspro (talk) 22:18, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
I'd say it comes down to the small number of units of each spaceship, rocket, rover, etc., they produce. This means a huge effort and brainpower is needed to design and test all those new devices. It's not like at a car company, where, once the design is completed, they produce a million of them, and little thought is required for building them. I'd actually like to see NASA and it's suppliers get more into a mass production mode.
For example, for Mars exploration, once they design an unmanned ship to deliver supplies for a future manned mission, instead of redesigning each iteration, they should just keep sending the same design, unless they identify a specific design flaw. Or, for a present example, the Mars Opportunity (rover) is still operational after over a decade, so they should build and launch 100 exactly like that, which would bring down the per-unit costs dramatically and allow for massive exploration of Mars' surface. StuRat (talk) 22:10, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
"Why can't (don't?) we mass produce space probes?" was asked on the Science desk in 2011. The cost of engineering and manufacturing a space probe is not the most significant contribution to the total operating cost. Nimur (talk) 22:15, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
That's not how I read it. The costs were listed as "approximately $820 million total, consisting approximately of $645 million spacecraft development and science instruments; $100 million launch; $75 million mission operations and science processing". So, that $645 can be essentially eliminated on the repeat runs. The remaining $175 million can probably also be reduced, by economy of scale, on repeats. For example, a lot of that was probably spent on hiring people, training them, building launch and operations facilities, etc. If the same people can be used for subsequent launches, and the same facilities, that should save money. Or, where new facilities are needed, we already have the designs, so those can just be cloned. StuRat (talk) 22:22, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Every rover is an experiment. So that its prodigy that follows in it tracks can do even better science, based on the lessons learnt from the former probes.--Aspro (talk) 22:37, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that's how NASA currently thinks, which results in very few rovers at very high expense each. StuRat (talk) 02:38, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

In journals or CDC or NIH reports, etc, are there mathematical models, or estimates about timeline of growing ineffectiveness of the remaining effective antibiotics?[edit]

Also, I presume there are researchers at major medical colleges thinking about when and which diseases will become untreatable by antibiotics. I would like to know the names of such scientists, as well as, as I said, papers in journals and reports. Maybe the CDC and NIH keep it secret? Thanks.Rich (talk) 22:55, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

CDC has a 114 page booklet about antibiotic resistance threats (2013) (link), with lots of line charts for the different antibiotics/infection combinations (page 56, 61, 72, 74, 76...).
In the absence of antibiotics, non-resistant strains usually outcompete the resistant ones, so resistance isn't inevitable, it depends on medical practices to prevent transmission of resistant strains, reducing unnecessary and wrong dosage antibiotic prescription, choosing the right one...
Some models are used to predict the best treatment strategy to prevent multiple resistance (link). This article gives a literature review and classification of existing models. A detailed model (with lots of maths) can be found here, a shorter article here.
Predictions can be found in the popular press, here, and the UK report it refers to here, which predicts ten million deaths per year due to resistance in 2050. Ssscienccce (talk) 01:27, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

October 4[edit]


September 26[edit]

Quantum Fields Fluctuations, Time stop[edit]

Quantum Fields Fluctuations, Time stop is a newly created article that I found while going through CAT:CSD; it was incorrectly tagged as a test page, and I couldn't immediately think of another criterion that applied. (1) What is this talking about? Is it at least partly sensible, or is it pure gibberish? (2) Is there already an article on this topic, and if so, what is it? If possible, I'd like to use an A10 speedy deletion to save time (I can't imagine this being an appropriate article) instead of sending it to AFD. Nyttend (talk) 20:26, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I'd call it CSD G1: Content that, while apparently intended to mean something, is so confusing that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it. Unless things have changed since the last time I looked, a speedy deletion is done "without prejudice", so if it's a mistake, it can be corrected later. --Trovatore (talk) 20:30, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Not sure where that quote comes from; G1 is "Pages consisting entirely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history". I can understand the words (just not what they're being used to mean), and anyway I wonder if a reasonable person familiar with maths might be able to make a good deal of sense out of it. I was wondering if it were somehow related to relativity-caused time dilation? Nyttend (talk) 21:04, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
See the link to Wikipedia:Patent nonsense. It's the second clause in the definition. The abridgment on the CSD page reduces it to "incoherent" and "no meaningful content", but the linked page explains more fully how those terms are intended. --Trovatore (talk) 21:07, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
As to your other point: If you put unlimited effort into it, you can make some sort of sense out of just about anything, but at some point it's coming more from you than from the text. G1 is not for just plain bad writing, but I think the author bears a burden of making sure you can tell whether you're really interpreting their content or just letting it inspire you to make something up. It's not a bright line. That's why it's "without prejudice" (no DRV required to fix a mistake). --Trovatore (talk) 21:23, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
  • We may note that the first of the authorities listed at the bottom is homonymous with the contributor. —Tamfang (talk) 08:34, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
The other two references are textbooks that are commonly used in introductory quantum field theory courses.
The article isn't utter gibberish; the heavily mathematical part looks a lot like a standard QFT calculation. It is, at the very least, original research that shouldn't be published on Wikipedia. -- BenRG (talk) 20:11, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
I have nominated the article for deletion via Articles for deletion. If anyone thinks that it should be speedied rather than deleted after seven days, they can go ahead and nominate it for speedy deletion. If anyone can fix it in seven days, they can fix it in seven days. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:26, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
It was speedy-deleted under A11 as original research. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:14, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

September 27[edit]

Dirichlet eta function[edit]

Is there inverse function for eta function. Which gives value of s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:45, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

No, the eta function is not one-to-one. Sławomir
14:04, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Wow, déjà vu. --RDBury (talk) 18:45, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Medians are to Symmedians what Heights are to ... ?[edit]

The reflections of medians with regard to angle bisectors are called symmedians, and all three are concurrent. Do the three concurrent reflections of heights with regard to angle bisectors also bear a special name ? — (talk) 14:26, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

They meet in the circumcenter, the latter being the isogonal conjugate of the orthocenter. — (talk) 15:05, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Apparently the term symaltitude seems to have been used by some. — (talk) 18:20, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Is this kind of statistical problem, able to be solved?[edit]

Imagine we have a rpg where you roll ((4d100)/2) -1 to find some stat like strenght, and females get a -14 modifier, that means you roll the dice and do the math and then remove -14 from it, this means that how entire world human population strenght is distributed can be seen by looking at this formula.
Now imagine another rpg that you roll 3d6 to find the stats.
Anyway, is there a way to convert the -14 to the 3d6 distribution? (talk) 17:22, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I hope that I'm not alone in not having the faintest idea what this is asking.→ (talk) 18:25, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict)For those of us who have never been a dungeon master, the notation 4d100 means roll a 100 sided die 4 times and add the results. I'm thinking the way to approach this is to convert the -14 into standard deviations (s.d.), then convert this number of s.d. to points for the other stat. The variance of 100 sided die would be 816.7833.25, so for 4 die it would be 4 times that and when you divide by 2 the variance is divided by 4, so the variance of he stat is again 816.7833.25. The s.d. of the stat is then √816.7 = 28.6√833.25 = 28.9, so -14 is about -1/2 of a s.d. For the second stat, the s.d. for a six sided die is 2.92 and for 3 die it's 8.75. The s.d. of the second stat is then 2.96. So the equivalent to -1/2 s.d in points for the second stat is about -1.5. Not sure what to do about the half point since you probably want stats which are whole numbers; flip a coin maybe. --RDBury (talk) 18:40, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
The variance of a 100-sided die is 833.25, right? Bo Jacoby (talk) 04:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC).
Looks like it: E[X^2]-E[X]^2 = \dfrac{1}{100}\sum_{k=1}^{100}k^2 - \left(\dfrac{1}{100}\sum_{k=1}^{100}k\right)^2 = 833.25. --Kinu t/c 07:31, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Yep, I misread the formula. It's in Variance#Fair die. --RDBury (talk) 11:19, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
The sd of 3d6 is \sqrt{3} times the sd of 1d6, not 3 times. Also, it seems you've made an error in calculating the sd of 1d6 as well - it would be impossible for the sd to be 2.92 when the deviation cannot be more than 2.5. The correct sd of 3d6 is \sqrt{3}\cdot\sqrt{35/12} \approx \sqrt{3} \cdot 1.70783 \approx 2.95804. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 18:05, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
In the sentence "the s.d. for a six sided die is 2.92 and for 3 die it's 8.75", should be "variance" instead of "s.d.". -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 18:21, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

If you are interested in the mathematics (rather than just getting an answer on a silver platter). You can read this website. [[[22]] (talk) 05:58, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

The expression
 \dfrac{1}{100}\sum_{k=1}^{100}k^2 - \left(\dfrac{1}{100}\sum_{k=1}^{100}k\right)^2
could be interpreted to mean
 \dfrac{1}{100}\sum_{k=1}^{100}\left(k^2 - \left(\dfrac{1}{100}\sum_{k=1}^{100}k\right)^2\right) .
It is safer to write
 \left(\dfrac{1}{100}\sum_{k=1}^{100}k^2\right) - \left(\dfrac{1}{100}\sum_{k=1}^{100}k\right)^2
Bo Jacoby (talk) 13:57, 28 September 2015 (UTC).
  • Perhaps, but the context makes the latter a more plausible interpretation. --Kinu t/c 17:14, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
The "alternative interpretation" uses the same variable in two nested quantifications, so it is extremely awkward at best, meaningless at worst. There's no real risk of confusion. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 18:05, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
The expression
 \dfrac{1}{100}\sum_{k=1}^{100}\left(k^2 - \left(\dfrac{1}{100}\sum_{k=1}^{100}k\right)^2\right) 
=  \dfrac{1}{100}\sum_{k=1}^{100}\left(k^2 - 50.5^2\right) = 833.25
is perfectly well defined, and is a perfectly plausible interpretation. Bo Jacoby (talk) 06:05, 29 September 2015 (UTC).
There may be weird syntaxes which allow it, but basically, you shouldn't use k as a summation value inside a scope which already assigns meaning to k. You'll have two different variables, both called k, in the same expression, and you can't know which one is being referred to. (You can use the convention that it always refers to the innermost scope, but that's just a sure recipe for confusion and disaster).
Curiously, the two expressions actually have the same value, since putting the second term inside the sum simply sums it as a constant 100 times and then divides by 100. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 14:04, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
It is a special case of E[(X–E[X])^2] = E[X^2]–E[X]^2 = E[X^2–E[X]^2]. Bo Jacoby (talk) 03:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC).
If I understand correctly, you want to apply some transformation on a strength (not "strenght" as you wrote) attribute obtained with the first method, so that it would be on the same scale as an attribute obtained from the second method.
Following RDBury's calculations, ((4d100)/2)-1 has a mean of 100 and sd of 28.8661, and 3d6 has a mean of 10.5 and sd of 2.95804. So if you take the original value, multiply it by 0.28661/2.95804 = 0.102475, and then add 0.2525, you'll get a value with mean and variance equal to the 3d6 distribution. So for example, 120 from the first method will be equivalent to 12.55 on the second method.
Alternatively, you can simply divide the value by 10 and get a very good approximation (and then add 0.5 for an even better one). In fact, I suspect that the reason ((4d100)/2)-1 was chosen is that it matches the distribution of the original 3d6, just with a factor of 10 which allows a finer resolution.
Now, if there is a modifier of -14, you simply multiply it by the same amount (0.102475, or approximately, divide by 10). So on the 3d6 scale you need to subtract 1.4 for females. If you don't want fractional values, you can roll a 1d10 and subtract 2 if you get 1-4, and 1 if you get 5-10. Or toss a coin and choose 1 or 2 based on the result. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 18:05, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Intuitively (admittedly, the intuition of a long-time roleplayer), the curves are going to be somewhat different. Larger numbers of dice generally produce a "smoother" curve, i.e. a better approximation to a bell curve, so 4d100 is going to give a different distribution of results to 3d6 no matter how carefully you scale it. [] can be used to plot these probabilities (with all divisions rounded down). Unfortunately, it only takes whole numbers in formulae, but this gives a good comparison (from Meni's simpler formula above):
   output 3d6
   output (4d100+8)/20
(4d100+8)/20 = ((4d100/2)-1)/10 + 0.5. The biggest difference is that values of 0,1,2,19 and 20 are possible in the 4d100 distribution, which are impossible in the 3d6 distribution. MChesterMC (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Right. There are two factors at play here:
  1. Using d100 instead of d6. This allows a finer resolution, so you can have a distinction between, say, 103 and 100, which is impossible in the scaled down version.
  2. Using 4d instead of 3d. The more dice you add up, the better the approximation to the normal curve. This can most easily be seen by comparing the kurtosis - 3d6 has 2.57714, 4d100 has 2.69994, the normal distribution has 3 (The kurtosis of 3d∞ and 4d∞ is 2.6 and 2.7). As you note, this won't change by a linear transformation.
However, the mean and variance are the most important attributes of a random variable, and by just matching these you will get a result which is difficult to distinguish in practice - especially when the difference in kurtosis is so small (3 dice already get you fairly close to normal). -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 18:36, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
PS. I suspect that your intuition about the difference between few and many dice, is based mostly on the difference in variance. 1d10+2 has a much higher variance than 3d4, and that's easy to notice. But if you linearly transform to match variance, and you use 3+ dice which are already close to normal, I'll be surprised (and impressed) if you can actually notice the remaining differences in the distribution. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 09:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
There's certainly some difference, going back to, and inputting "output ndX/n" for constant x and various values of N, then going to the "graph" tab shows the changes. You probably can't tell the difference between 4d6/4 and 5d6/5, but you probably can between 4d6/4 and 20d6/20 (the former having about a 40% chance of a 3 (all results rounded down), the latter having about an 81% chance). MChesterMC (talk) 16:04, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
4d6/4 and 20d6/20 have very different variances (35/48 and 7/48). Variance is linear in the number of dice but quadratic in multiplication factors, so in general the variance of xd6/x will be inversely proportional to x. As I explained, that's the main cause of the difference you're seeing. If you want to roll 20d6 and scale it to similar mean and variance as 4d6/4, the correct transformation isn't 20d6/20, it's 20d6/8.94-4.326. Anydice won't allow decimal places, but if you try 20d6/9-17/4 you'll get results which are pretty close. To visually see the similarity in the graph, though, you'll have to note the change in the x-axis displayed, and focus on the range 1-6. And of course, the fact that we have to round down (and the probabilities depend on how many original results map to a given value) causes some disruption (since the transformation was computed with the assumption that we don't round). -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 17:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks - as a side note, inputting both dice rolls at once, and clicking the "graph" view, shows the two graphs overlaid on each other for easy comparison. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MChesterMC (talkcontribs) 08:09, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I finally understood that you meant we should include both output lines in the same page.
Playing around with it a bit more, and taking the rounding into account, better ways to match 3d6 with 4d100 are either (4d100+17)/20 or (5*4d100+67)/98.
As for 4d6/4 and which we've also discussed, if you want to match it with 20d6, you'll get an impressively good fit with (20d6-38)/9. When there's rounding involved, you get smoother results in cases that matching the variance just requires dividing by an integer. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 09:04, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
PS. If you compare 4d6/4 and (20d6-38)/9, you may note that the latter can take values of 0 and even negative. Even if these values are meaningless in the game context, it's really less of an issue than it sounds. You can simply specify a rule that if you get results outside the legal range, you roll again. Since the probability of this happening is so low (1 in a 1000 in this case), you will probably never have to worry about it, and it won't change the statistical properties of the roll. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 09:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for all the info (and continue trying to find a better answer), anyway this gave me some eureka moment, a digital song is made of values (samples, that is, interger values that are positive, negative and 0), you could get a song A and then song B, and calculate the average and standard deviation of stuff and etc..., and then get one of the songs, get their samples and and convert to other song average and standard deviation, maybe would sounds cool. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

September 29[edit]

Difference tends to 0[edit]

Two functions on the natural numbers are asymptotically equivalent if their quotient tends to 1. Is there a similar term for pairs of functions whose difference tends to 0? GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 02:55, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't know of a name, but it is perhaps worth noting that if the difference converges to 0 and each function is bounded away from zero in the asymptote then this already implies that the quotient tends to 1, and hence that the functions are asymptotically equivalent. So the ideas are quite similar, and perhaps there isn't a new name. I would also note that the converse is not true. Quotient tends to 1 does not generally imply a difference goes to zero (e.g. lim (x+5)/x as x increases). Dragons flight (talk) 07:49, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
If the difference tends to zero, then the functions are curvilinear asymptotic (as well as asymptotically equivalent). Dbfirs 08:19, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
I think for something like this you could use something like f(n) = g(n) + o(1); see the little o section of Big O notation. --RDBury (talk) 15:59, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Law of large numbers and the running average[edit]

So according to the law of large numbers, the sample mean for a well behaved variable will approach the true mean following sufficiently many observations. I'm curious though about how the sample mean changes as you increase the number of observations. So consider an experiment that repeats for infinitely many trials. The running sample mean is the average of all measures of variable X on trials 1 to N. According to the LLN, the running sample mean should trend toward the true mean as N increases. But if we allow N to increase forever, does it have a chance of deviating from the true mean even momentarily?

I hope I'm getting my question across properly. Obviously, if I decide to only look at the last K trials, I will inevitably get a group of K trials that deviates significantly from the true mean. It's simple to ask a question like, for a series of N coin tosses, what is the chance that more than 51% of tosses results in heads? Easy. But what about this question, the same as my original but formulated differently: Bob begins tossing a coin. He never ever stops. Assuming he tosses his coin at least K times, what is the chance that he ever sees more than 51% of his total tosses result in heads?

My question is partially motivated by a putative method of data rigging in scientific experiments - if you don't get the results you want, repeat the test. Include all data in your average, but just keep going until the average is what you want. I'm wondering if this is even a feasible thing to do, statistically. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:44, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, there is a non-zero chance that any possible deviation occurs in the sequence of partial means. For example, there is roughly a 6.2% chance that a fair coin has produced 60% heads at some point after 10 trials. Such odds diminish with the number of trials. For example, after 20 or more trials, the odds of encountering 60% heads of a fair coin drops to about 0.7%. The larger the deviation from the true mean, the less likely it is be encountered by continued random testing. Dragons flight (talk) 08:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Could you let me know how you calculate that? Might help me understand how to prove the probability is greater than 0 but not 1. Thanks. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:23, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
This doesn't seem right. The probability of >=60% heads at the 11th trial is 27.4%. The probability it will be >=60% at some point from 11th trial and up should be higher (and if you meant 10th and up, higher still - I got in simulation 52% for that). -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 18:52, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
See large deviations theory, and especially the first example where the probability that the sample mean after N trials deviates from the mean of the random variable is determined. Sławomir
10:18, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
It is useful to introduce some notation. For the coin case, let X_i be iid Bernoulli trials with probability 1/2. Let Y_i=\sum_{j=1}^iX_i and Z_i = Y_i/i. You are asking, for some k, what is the probability that there is i\ge k such that Z_i \ge 0.51?
It is easier to calculate the expectation of the number of i \ge k such that Z_i \ge 0.51. This is equal to \mathbb{E}[\sum_{i=k}^{\infty}[Z_i \ge 0.51] = \sum_{i=k}^{\infty}\mathbb{E}[ [Z_i \ge 0.51] ] = \sum_{i=k}^{\infty}\mathrm{Pr}(Z_i \ge 0.51). The variables Z_i are not independent but that does not stop us from using the linearity of expectation. You can estimate each summand based on the binomial distribution or normal approximation. For large enough k, you'll find that the result is between 0 and 1, from which it follows that the chance there will be at least one such i is also between 0 and 1. (Note that because of the large correlations, the actual probability will be much less than this calculated mean). -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 13:22, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
(ec) That is a good question, and the answer is not immediately obvious. The answer is 1. It is almost certain that it eventually happens that more than 51% of the total tosses result in heads.
The probability that it ever happens is the complement of the probability that it never happens.
The probability that is never happens is the product of the probabilities that it does not happen.
The probability that it does not happen is the complement of the probability that it does happen.
The event of crossing the 51% line from below means that i/n ≤ 0.51 and (i+1)/(n+1) > 0.51. So 0.51n−0.49 < i ≤ 0.51n. If integer i is less or equal to x, then i is also less or equal to the floor function of x. So 0.51n−0.49 < i = floor(0.51n). The crossing can happen only when 0.51n−0.49 < floor(0.51n), and the corresponding i-value is i = floor(0.51n). The probability for that is
\binom n i 2^{-n}
and the probability that the toss number n+1 is head is 1/2.
So the probability of a crossing after n is
p_n = \left[0.51 n -0.49 < floor(0.51 n)\right]\frac 1 2 \binom n {floor(0.51 n)} 2^{-n}
The probability of no crossing at n is
The probability of crossing never is
\prod_{n=k}^\infty (1-p_n)
and the probability of crossing ever is
1-\prod_{n=k}^\infty (1-p_n)
This expression is coded in J. Starting at K=100, tossing 900 times more. The probability of ever crossing the 51% line is
Bo Jacoby (talk) 14:46, 29 September 2015 (UTC).
I'm sorry but that's obviously false. Your statement directly contradicts the LLN. If it's almost sure to happen no matter where we start, then it's almost sure to happen infinitely many times, and the sample means can't converge.
Your main problem is that you've chosen k too small. At 100 tosses, the number of heads has mean 50 and sd 5, so naturally there is a high chance of getting more than 51%. So the result was close enough to 1 that you were tricked into thinking the difference is merely due to not summing all the way.
Try a bigger k (say 100,000. Alternatively, a bigger value than 51%) and you'll see how the probability is not 1. If you think about it, you are in fact suggesting that the last expression is 1 no matter what k is, which is impossible since adding terms in the beginning obviously changes the result (unless all the p's are zero, which they're not).
Your other problem is that you've incorrectly assumed the events are independent. You can't multiply out the probabilities like this. I'm not sure if this materially affects the result. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello Meni! You are probably right. Feel free to improve my result.
  1. The LLN does not say that the mean always converges. I says that the mean almost always converges. Infinite sequences of 0s and 1s having divergent means are improbable but not impossible.
  2. Any finite value of k is dwarfed by the infinity. Is it obvious that the probability depends on k?
  3. My program does not allow k=10000 as 2^1024 evaluates to infinity.
  4. Rather than computing the probability one could simulate. Computing the maximum mean of 50000 random coin tosses, omitting the first 1000:
2^1023 1024
8.98847e307 _
p=. 4 :'1-*/1-(m<i+1-x)*(y!~i=.<.m=.x*y)%2^1+y'
0.51 p 300+i.730
0.55 p 300+i.730
Bo Jacoby (talk) 22:25, 29 September 2015 (UTC).
  1. Right, that's why I specified it's not just able to diverge, it almost surely diverges. The LLN says it converges with probability 1, and a result of your statement is that it converges with probability 0. So the statements aren't compatible.
  2. Actually what I said about the dependence of k is incorrect, just from the expression it's not obvious it can't be 1. The real reason it's obvious is the nature of Brownian motion. Progress of Brownian motion is square-root in nature, and here we expect it to catch up with a linearly growing target. If it doesn't catch up in the beginning, there's a good chance it will never catch up (with the probability of catching up decreasing exponentially, and thus the sum converging to a small amount). You might be interested in my analysis of an equivalent problem (bankruptcy of PPS Bitcoin mining pools) here, appendix C.
  3. Well, consider switching to Mathematica :). I implemented this in Mathematica (I made some continuity approximations) and got a result of 0.672 for k=10,000, and 6.21E-9 for k=100,000. This is assuming your expression is correct, about which I'm not sure because of the independence issue. Alternatively, you can also see this by keeping k low and increasing the threshold to, say 75%.
  4. It seems the simulation corroborates that 51% is fairly easy to reach at the ~1000 tosses range, but larger deviations will be difficult - and of course, with larger k, 51% won't be reached either.
-- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 09:13, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Considering switching, please show what the J program looks like when converted to Mathematica. A continuity approximation is convenient because the exact formula gives huge intermediate result.
\binom n i 2^{-n} \approx \frac{e^{-\frac {z^2}2}}{\sqrt{2\pi}}dz where z=\frac {i-\mu}\sigma and \mu=\frac n 2 and \sigma=\frac{\sqrt n} 2 and dz=\frac {di}\sigma and di=1
In J this is:
q =. 4 : '(^--:*:s%~x--:y)%(%:o.2)*s=.-:%:y'
Using this approximation the probability computation is
p =. 4 : '-.*/-.(m<i+1-x)*-:(i=.<.m=.x*y) q y'
The test computation
0.51 p 300+i.730
is reasonably close to the former result 0.994277.
Meni Rosenfeld's example k=10000
0.51 p 10000+i.100000
is reasonably close to Meni's result of 0.672
Bo Jacoby (talk) 18:16, 3 October 2015 (UTC).
This is the Mathematica code I used:
q[n_] := 0.49*1/2*Binomial[n, 0.51 n] 2^-n
1 - Exp[NSum[Log[1 - q[n]], {n, 10000, \[Infinity]}]]
The continuity approximation is in replacing [0.51 n - 0.49 < \lfloor0.51 n\rfloor] with 0.49, and \binom{n}{\lfloor0.51n\rfloor} with \binom{n}{0.51n} (with the Gamma function used for the extension). This makes it tremendously easier to use numerical summation methods.
If I were to use the original form without any optimizations, it would look something like
q[n_] := If[0.51 n - 0.49 < Floor[0.51 n], 1, 0]*1/2*Binomial[n, Floor[0.51 n]] 2^-n
1 - Exp[Sum[Log[1 - q[n]], {n, 10000, \[Infinity]}]]
-- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 20:09, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Primitive part of fibonacci[edit]

The last section of the article fibonacci prime has a red link to something called the "primitive part" which doesn't seem to be defined anywhere. It appears that what's intended is the product of prime factors of Fn of which are not factors of previous entries. It looks like the corresponding OEIS sequence calls these primitive primes, though it's not really defined. [23] defines primitive part somewhat differently, and I get the primitive part of F6 as 4 according to it, not 1 as listed in the article. This definition gives OEISA061446 which OEIS also calls primitive part. There are other definitions floating around though, e.g. something called the Lucas-Aurifeuillian primitive part. Is there a standard definition of primitive part being used in the article or is it the result of confusing primitive part and primitive prime? --RDBury (talk) 17:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

September 30[edit]

Curve fitting[edit]

I need an approximation formula for a family of functions that I cannot evaluate easily. Each function f(x) has these properties:

  1. f(0) = 0
  2. f(x) \rightarrow 0, as x \rightarrow \infty
  3. f has a single maximum, at x_{max} (the value of x_{max} varies among the functions in the family)
  4. between 0 and x_{max}, f is concave (aka concave downward) (Edited: This is not exactly true: f has a small region of convexity where x \in [0,y), for some small value of y. It's OK if this is ignored.)
  5. between x_{max} and \infty, f is initially concave, then convex

Except for property 4, the graph of f bears a superficial resemblance to that of a Poisson distribution.

What function families might provide a good basis for an approximation formula? Thanks. -- (talk) 14:28, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

ax^be^{-cx}, for a>0,\ 0<b\le1,\ c>0. x_{max}=b/c. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 17:03, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure your expression actually gives x_{max} = b/c. Dragons flight (talk) 08:55, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
You're right of course, fixed. That's what happens when I try to use different notation in my calculations and the writeup... -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 12:49, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Just to make sure I understand the description, does the graph look something like this ?
|          o 
|     o         o
|  o                o
|o                        o  
StuRat (talk) 17:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Qualitatively, yes, but I'd add that graphs of the functions are markedly skewed to the left.-- (talk) 19:05, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Maxwell distribution. (talk) 05:55, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
This doesn't start out downward convex. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 08:36, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
On closer examination, I found that f actually has a small region of convexity in [0,y) for some small y. This is kind of subtle and it's OK if it is ignored. -- (talk) 22:35, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
In this case, b can be slightly higher than 1 in my function above. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 10:39, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
If you want more parameters, you can use something like e^{a+bx+cx^2}((x+x_0)^d-x_0^d). In particular, the quadratic term in the exponent (which also exists in the Maxwell distribution pdf) allows for a steeper decline once the maximum is reached. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 13:31, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2[edit]

October 4[edit]


September 29[edit]

South African Hansard from the apartheid era[edit]

Does anyone know where I can find (ideally searchable...) online transcripts of the South African parliament, written questions etc. during the apartheid era? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:35, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I think you are looking for Hansard replies called National Assembly Question and Replies but there are also National Assembly Executive Replies to Questions and National Council of Provinces Executive Replies to Questions.
Sleigh (talk) 09:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Here is the link Sleigh is referring to: Hansard Replies. Click on each category to browse by date. They go back to 1970 and there is a keyword search box at the bottom of the page. (talk) 17:50, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Welfare and Insurance[edit]

What's the difference between welfare and insurance?

Desklin (talk) 09:01, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Have a look at our article on Social insurance to get you started. Itsmejudith (talk) 09:47, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Insurance of any kind involves a large number of people paying in to a system, with the expectation that only a relatively small percentage of those people will be getting money back at any given time. Figuring out how to optimize the premiums against the statistically expected amount of payouts (i.e. the "risk") is called Actuarial science. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:26, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Insurance is a device to make risk predictable. You don't know how much you'll lose this year to crime or accidents or acts of god, but an actuary can estimate very accurately how much a large number of people like you will lose, and sell you that certainty (with a markup that you'll happily pay if you're risk-averse). Ideally, the price of insuring you is proportional to the expected value of your losses, so there's no expected transfer from one customer to another; this is not even roughly true of state welfare. (Probably the safety net services of the friendly societies were closer to pure insurance.) —Tamfang (talk) 02:57, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Insurance and Helping the Poor[edit]

Is insurance to help poor people? Desklin (talk) 09:05, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

The traditional "mission statement" of insurance is that in the event of an insured loss, "...there followeth not the undoing of any man, but the loss lighteth rather easily upon many than upon a few." (Marine Insurance Act, 1601). In some cases, those with huge resources can do without insurance. An often quoted example was London Transport, who before the privatisation of their bus services, never insured their vehicles, they simply covered any costs from their own funds. To comply with the law, they had to establish a court bond to guarantee that any liability claims could be met. But yes, if an ordinary person's car is stolen, he or she probably won't have the means to go out and buy a similar one; that's what insurance is for. Have a look at our insurance article. Alansplodge (talk) 10:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Similarly my father worked for a multinational company with a large vehicle fleet, which had an insurance policy with third-party cover and a £100,000 (probably equivalent of £500,000 today) excess. This evidently worked out very cheap, covering the whole fleet for a nominal fee, but covered legal requirements to be insurance - and I suppose the unlikely event that someone would run over a group of premier division footballers and run up a liability that would show even on a multinational's balance sheet. -- Q Chris (talk) 10:18, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Apart from vehicle insurance, which is normally a legal requirement, "poor people" typically wouldn't choose to spend money on insurance premiums, and wouldn't have goods worth insuring anyway.--Shantavira|feed me 11:32, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Ah, I see we have in our midst an acolyte of Australia's recently departed Treasurer Joe Hockey: [24]. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 19:43, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
  • It depends to some extent what type of insurance you're talking about. In general, you less out of insurance than you put in, which makes it expensive for the poor, but some long term schemes (such as whole life insurance) do gain in value, and for people without savings, being able to cover the very-high costs of an unexpected disaster (death, illness, fire) through smaller regular payments is of great benefit (in decades gone by, where there were few jobs for women that paid enough to support a family, working men were very worried that a workplace accident might mean homelessness or even starvation for their wives and children). Some types of insurance are created by socialist or liberal governments to benefit the poor: the British National Insurance scheme was explicitly created and developed to provide employment benefits to the working class (first as part of Asquith's Liberal reforms, and later developed by Atlee's Labour government). At the other extreme, you have schemes like payment protection insurance which were little more than scams to get more money from vulnerable borrowers (expensive PPI deals were attached to subprime loans, and supposedly covered you if you couldn't pay back the loan, but it was generally very difficult to fulfill the terms of the PPI and get your money back). In these cases, the only people the insurance really helps are the shareholders of the bank. Smurrayinchester 12:30, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
  • In general, the purpose of private insurance is to protect property interests from catastrophic losses, whether the loss be from medical expenses (health insurance), the loss of a wage-earner's income (life insurance), property destruction (fire insurance), or lawsuits (liability insurance), etc. This implies a level of wealth that is great enough to need protection, but not so great that the losses can be easily borne. In contrast, the purpose of social insurance is to protect ordinary people from expenses that they might otherwise be unable to bear, typically retirement (Social Security), inability to work (disability insurance), or medical expenses (state-sponsored health insurance, such as Medicare and Medicaid in the United States). So social insurance could be said to be for poor people, while private insurance really is not. John M Baker (talk) 13:25, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
The purpose of insurance is to help a given policyholder try to recover from a financial loss. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:27, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
  • One concept which insurance takes advantage of is a Risk pool. The idea is thus: insurance works because more money goes into the system of insurance than gets paid out by the system, but from the point of view of the policy holders, the insurance prevents catastrophic loss on account of whatever is being insured against (health issues, fire, floods, etc.) The system works efficiently when a) the policy holder pays an insurance premium which is low enough to be inconsequential, and b) there are enough payers to make sure the insurer can cover the cost of those insurees who actually make a claim. One of the claimed benefits of Obamacare is that, by making the risk pool larger by forcing more people to buy insurance, there's more available money to cover more people, and also to cover riskier people (those more likely to actually need the insurance they are paying for). In an ideal insurance market, the situation is "win-win": the insured pays a low enough premium as to have minimal financial impact on the rest of their finances, but is covered by the insurer in the event some catastrophic event occurs, and for the insuror, enough money comes in through premiums from people who don't actually use the insurance to cover the costs of those who do. --Jayron32 06:00, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Once you accept that insurance (ideally) protects you from catastrophic loss, the difference between the poor and the wealthy is simply the definition of catastrophic. If you have the resources to simply buy a new car whenever you feel like it, the loss of one would not be catastrophic (though you'll still be required by law to have insurance on it). However, the loss of your $1 billion super yacht might well be catastrophic even for the wealthiest, and they would probably want to insure against that. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Since it's come up a couple times, I'll point out that the requirement to have car insurance is mostly to make sure that when you crash into someone else's $1bn super yacht (or ferrari, or house), they don't end up out of pocket due to your driving and subsequent inability to pay damages. There's no particular reason for the law to care whether you can replace your own car. This is also one of the reasons why many small cheap cars driven by new drivers cost more than the cost of the car to insure - they aren't saying you're going to write it off in the year, just that you might crash into and write off another car which is worth a lot more. MChesterMC (talk) 08:28, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Right, "car insurance" in many jurisdictions is required to include liability insurance for events involving the insured vehicle(s). It covers much more than just paying to repair or replace a vehicle. It will pay for basically any costs stemming from a covered event, including medical costs, any kind of property damage (say someone crashes their vehicle into a building), legal costs, etc. You have to be really rich for it to not be financially worthwhile to carry vehicle insurance (ignoring legal requirements), because there's always the potential of huge liabilities stemming from driving (especially in countries without universal health care). Not to mention that if you're known to be rich, it makes you an attractive target for lawsuits. -- (talk) 07:39, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

What is the nationality of Toni Romiti ?[edit]

--Hijodetenerife (talk) 16:09, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not yet have an article about Toni Romiti, though google has some information. This is not a reliable source, but if it is factual, she was born in Chicago and raised in South Carolina, making her nationality American. --Jayron32 16:15, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
If you're asking about her ancestry, which in this early blog from her teenage basketball days she calls her "ethnicity" - her late father was Italian and mother African-American. -- Deborahjay (talk) 20:14, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Did Canada have witch trails trials like Salem did?[edit]

I'm interested in it's history. (talk) 20:23, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

No. There were isolated incidents only, see the references provided over here at yahoo answers. (talk) 21:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
This unreliable source notes only one known Canadian burned for witchcraft, one Daniel Vuil. However, this biography of Vuil states that he was sentenced to execution for "trafficking in spirits with the Indians", which means that he was selling liquor (distilled spirit) and not that he was conjuring ghosts. I'm not sure if the first, unreliable source is confused by the use of the word "spirit", which is likely, since the second source, the Dictionary of Canadian Biography is scrupulously reliable and makes no mention of witchcraft. However, that path led me to search for the term "witch" at the DCB, which lead me to this, which is probably a really good start for your research. --Jayron32 21:26, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I've corrected the section title. At least, I assume I'm making a correction. -- (talk) 22:53, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

When you change a section title you need to add {{Anchor|Did Canada have witch trails like Salem did?}} or whatever the original title was immediately under the new title, or the section may not show up for those tracking it. μηδείς (talk) 00:40, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. -- (talk) 20:24, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Ghosts in Japan[edit]

Can you explain to me why in Japanese cartoons ghosts are often depicted with two or three flames around them? For example

I see it from multiple different unrelated authors so it must have some kind of cultural meaning or reason. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:01, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Have a look at Yūrei. This article says certain attributes become standardized in art and theatre to make ghost characters instantly recognizable. (talk) 21:16, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
They are hitodama (as is mentioned in the yūrei article). There's some more information in TV Tropes's Ghost Lights article. -- BenRG (talk) 03:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

@BenRG:why not add those information in wikipedia?

September 30[edit]

Identify the play: Bird at the window means death[edit]

I wonder if anyone can identify a play, presented on US network TV in the late 1950's in which a bird flaps at a window wanting in, and when an old man opens the window over the objections of his family, the man dies. On Google I only found references to superstitions about a bird flying against a window being an omen of someone dying. Edison (talk) 04:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

You misunderstand, a bird flying inside a house means death.
Sleigh (talk) 05:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes, Edison might also watch Six Feet Under through S4E5 where at imdb, "a bird some consider to be an omen and others merely to be an annoyance continues to invade the house. When Nate is insulted for allowing its return by not closing the window it originally entered through, he takes out all his frustration on the bird." This is a rather old superstition that I heard of through my grandmother, a Rusyn person. I know it is widespread through Eurasia, and assume that Marija Gimbutas's writings on the Bird Goddess will probably address it. I am not an expert on North American traditions, but someone else might comment. μηδείς (talk) 01:55, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
None of the above addressed "a play, presented on US network TV in the late 1950's" which was the info sought. I looked through all episodes of the TV drama series Playhouse 90 and that was not the venue. It could have been "US Steel Hour" or some series which presented more absurdist dramas. A site which describes all episodes of live TV drama from the 1950's "golden age of TV drama would be useful. I'm thinking 1957 through 1958. Edison (talk) 13:39, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


If Anglophone is to English speaking countries, and Francophonie is to French, then what is the German equivalent? -- (talk) 09:33, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Just "Germanophone" (or "Germanophon" in German). German sometimes uses the Latin-derived "Germano-" for language-related things. If you study German language and literature in school, that's called "Germanistik". Adam Bishop (talk) 09:39, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
See also German Sprachraum. --Wrongfilter (talk) 09:46, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I like teutonophone. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 09:56, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Germanophones can be subdivided by dialect, of course, into branches such as the Saxophones. —Tamfang (talk) 22:46, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

History of housing?[edit]

In pre-modern times, how did housing work - have there always (since the cave-dweller days) been some people who rented their housing and some who owned? Did renting work similarly in antiquity as today - where the tenant paid some amount every month (or whatever time period) to live in someone else's property? Or did it work differently? (talk) 14:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC)Nightvid

Is there a specific area of the world that you are interested in? Otherwise the question is probably too broad to summarize here. SemanticMantis (talk) 15:48, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Two articles to start on would be domus and insula (building), referring to the Roman era. Ancient Greeks are a bit tricky as they used adobe and it rained a bit in the inventing eons. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:41, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Medieval houses (going back at least as far as the 12th century) could be rented and bought and sold, and contracts and other legal documents about housing are remarkably similar to similar modern documents. They had mortgages and reverse mortgages and all that. I suspect this is because they were borrowing from Roman law although I've never looked into Roman housing law specifically (but any jurisdiction that still uses civil law probably owes a lot to the Roman law of late antiquity). Adam Bishop (talk) 20:15, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
And let's not forget feudalism and serfdom, where the serf generally owed payment in the form of crops and/or labor to their lord in exchange for their fief. Land tenure might be informative. -- (talk) 20:26, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
More specifically, Feudal_land_tenure_in_England. As far as I can tell from everything I've read about feudalism and Manorialism, rents and taxes were paid for land, not houses. I've always assumed that people (whether peasants or nobles) just built (or had built) whatever house they could afford with the resources they got from the land they rented minus those given to their lord in tax or rent. However, I realize now that I've never seen this explicitly stated anywhere, so it's possible an erroneous assumption. Here are some non-Wikipedia links on the subject:,,, The second link repeats the myth that people in the middle ages never (or almost never) bathed, so I'd be a bit skeptical about the other claims in that one. Iapetus (talk) 10:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Remember though that there were more people in the Middle Ages than just peasants and nobles. There were cities too, with merchants and craftsmen and other people who were the original "middle class". Adam Bishop (talk) 11:06, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Just on the question of timing, in Britain and Ireland rents were traditionally due on Quarter days. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

October 1[edit]

Clarington, Ontario[edit]

How many Claringtons are there in Ontario? Clarington, Ontario is a redirect to Clarington, because it was at the first title until someone moved it to the second title in 2011. However, the article has two hatnotes, both of which link to the redirect; one of them even mentions "the city in Courtice", and Courtice appears to be a neighborhood of the city that's the subject of the Clarington article, not vice versa. Is there another Clarington somewhere that should be linked? Is this just an artifact of the pagemove? I ended up here expecting that Clarington would be a redirect to Clarington, Ohio, and I'm not sure if I need to remove the currently unhelpful hatnotes and replace with {{this|the Ontario municipality|the Ohio community|Clarington, Ohio}} (because these are the only Claringtons) or create a disambiguation page (because there are three or more Clarington articles). Nyttend (talk) 13:52, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Looks like a bit of vandalism on September 10. olderwiser 14:21, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Most of your post I don't understand, but I can confirm that there is just one Clarington in Ontario. Gov of Ontario list. (talk) 19:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the solid source! You probably don't understand it because Bkonrad fixed the article before you looked at it. You'll understand better if you look at the article as it was when I found it. Nyttend (talk) 19:54, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure this was just a botched edit or a vandalous one as Bkronrad said, but I'll just note that the list only shows municipalities, i.e. places that are incorporated and have an official existence. It would theoretically be possible for an unincorporated community named Clarington to exist elsewhere in Ontario. I remember reading at the time when Cambridge, Ontario, was being created and the political battle over its name had just been settled, nobody taken account of the fact that there was already a Cambridge elsewhere in Ontario. (Sorry, I have no source to cite for this.) Obviously that was because the existing community was unincorporated.

Checking the Canadian Geographic Names Data Base, and requesting populated places of all types, I find only the one Clarington, Ontario, but the other (unincorporated) Cambridge, Ontario, is here, east of Ottawa. -- (talk) 02:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2[edit]


There was a test done in the mid 20th century on people where they would administer pain on others. I tested human response to authority figures. I forgot the name of this test. What was it called? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:42, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Are you perhaps thinking of the Stanford prison experiment? Or would the Milgram experiment be what you want? Nyttend (talk) 00:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I think what the OP had in mind was a study where people were asked to inflict pain on other people and were more willing to do it when the person giving the instruction was an authority figure. This did not happen in a prison environment. (talk) 13:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Information icon (talk) is one of several London area IP sockpuppets of banned User:Vote (X) for Change. See block log, WP:BMB .
Nor did the Stanford prison experiment take place in a prison environment: it took place at Stanford University in which a prison-like situation was simulated {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 13:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

more respectable interconnections[edit]

I was watching a YouTube video. It was from KITV. The video featured a 9/11 memorial ceremony being held for the first time aboard the USS Missouri (BB-63). Everything gave me ideas. I was going to create some artworks to remember the victims of that fateful morning and the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings. Where can I send the artworks when I finish them?2604:2000:712C:2900:91EC:A95A:18EF:2F46 (talk) 03:58, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Northeastern University maintains a collection of memorials from the marathon bombing. Maybe you could contact them. here is a website about the project. --Jayron32 04:07, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

are the legal codes of the various legal systems in public domain? if answer is in the positive, then the laws and penal codes of my current residential region as well as others can be posted in wikibooks as law books.[edit]

OP wants clear and exhaustive reply/ies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahfuzur rahman shourov (talkcontribs) 04:18, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, Mahfuzur rahman shourov, I'd look at the front and back matter of legal codes of the place where you live for a notice saying that the material is donated to the public domain. If you find such a notice, it's in the public domain; if you don't, it isn't. -- Hoary (talk) 05:13, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Hoary is this why there are no wikibook on the laws and legal systems of USA, The British penal codes and so on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahfuzur rahman shourov (talkcontribs) 05:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

It depends on the jurisdiction. In Lithuania, for example, laws, draft laws and decisions regarding laws (e.g., court decisions) are explicitly not subject to copyright. It is the same in many other countries - the law is a lot less useful if it can not be freely reproduced for people to see it. That said, it may not be the same in all countries. On the subject of law books, they are not usually limited to just the text of the laws, they organize the information and often provide analysis - that is subject to copyright.No longer a penguin (talk) 07:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@No longer a penguin and Hoary:my question is about the texts of the laws. example:british penal code ###, texan landowning law### and so on. rquesting for more replies by more users.

For the UK, Acts of Parliament, Bills introduced to parliament, or documents made under the direction or control of either House of Parliament are protected by either Crown Copyright or Parliamentary Copyright, so they are not public domain. I'm not going to dig into the Act to work out whether there are any relevant exceptions to infringement, since that would be legal advice (which we don't do here). The short andwer is, it's going to vary by country, and will probably be much more complicated than looking at the copyright laws of just that country - e.g. the governments of other "qualifying countries" are entitled to copyright under the UK Act, even if they aren't under their own law, and whether this applies to the text of the law of that country is going to be a complex question of fact and law. MChesterMC (talk) 08:23, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
As you can see on the ComLaw website, the official online repositry of Australian federal legislation, "© Commonwealth of Australia. Unless identified otherwise, all ComLaw content is copyright of the Commonwealth of Australia (the Australian Government)".--Shirt58 (talk) 08:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
US federal and state laws are not subject to copyright, see Copyright_law_of_the_United_States#Federal_and_state_laws_are_not_copyrighted. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:19, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
UK legislation is copyright but available under the Open Government Licence. But it would be difficult to compile the British "legal code" given the very large numbers of statutes that are currently in force or partly in force, to say nothing of common law. rossb (talk) 18:19, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Swedish legislation is explicitly not copyrighted, so you could post it in wikibooks. Not that it's a good idea, since there are several websites that post the updated versions of laws, sometimes even with short analyses and connected precedents. [25][26][27]. Making a wikibook means that you lose the update function. Sjö (talk) 18:35, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Born/died out of the 48.[edit]

Apart from Obama and McCain, was there any other major party presidential or vice-presidential nominee who was born or died out of the 48 contiguous states? (talk) 20:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Al Gore was born in Washington, D.C. so was born on the Contiguous United States, but not in one of 48 contiguous states per your statement and header. Natural-born-citizen clause#Eligibility challenges also has some people who were nominees who were born in one of the states, before it became a state (Barry Goldwater and Charles Curtis). Nil Einne (talk) 22:30, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
nevermind. Misread the question. RudolfRed (talk) 23:10, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
The early presidents were born before there were US states. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
There was a rumour that Chester A. Arthur was born outside of the US. It is untrue (per our article), but it does get mentioned sometimes when you research topics along these lines. (talk) 13:02, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Alexander Hamilton, while not a President or VP, was a founding father, and was born and raised in the West Indies. StuRat (talk) 15:36, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Ted Cruz, who is running so theoretically could get nominated, was born in Canada. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:27, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

October 3[edit]

Identifying a book[edit]

A few aeons ago I read a science-fiction novel that may have appeared in the '50s or '60s, whose setting was a future time when everyone on Earth is required by law to regularly attend Catholic masses. The protagonist wonders whether people in power have conspired to conceal the fact that a certain famous writer wrote certain things. At some point he concludes that the reason a short poem or the like by that writer was not found in books might not have been such a conspiracy but merely a result of the fact that (quoting verbatim) "Editors edit." I remember very little about the story and I have no idea what the name of the book or the name of the author was. Does anyone know? Michael Hardy (talk) 02:51, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I see where you asked this same question about 5 years ago here, does that help any? RegistryKey(RegEdit) 07:03, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
I hate to direct people elsewhere, but this is the sort of question that the folks at rec.arts.sf.written can often readily answer. Just click on the "New Topic" box and copy your query above, giving it a subject line like "YASID--Compulsory mass". ("YASID" stands for "Yet another story ID".) Deor (talk) 14:27, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Exemption from Crash testing in the US[edit]

Do absolutely all vehicles on the road undergo NHTSA crash testing in the US? Or are there some small exceptions? I'm thinking of things like mail trucks, firetrucks, ambulances. I noticed that some USPS mail trucks are designed without right side doors, to make entry/exit easier; I can't imagine that this would pass the strict auto safety standards nowadays.

One exception I can think of is farm equipment. AFAIK they don't undergo crash testing and yet they're legal on some public roads (depending on state and local laws). 731Butai (talk) 06:23, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

There was a problem with "light trucks", which includes pick-up trucks, SUVs, and full-sized vans (but not minivans), that they were classified as industrial vehicles rather than consumer vehicles, and remained so for quite some time after they should have been reclassified based on their popularity as consumer vehicles. This resulted in reduced testing requirements. I'm not sure if that situation has yet been resolved. StuRat (talk) 15:23, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
I think you're referring to this: Chicken_tax#Ramifications. 731Butai (talk) 02:58, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

is there any forum which analyzes written materials of any kind and reveals the political flavor of it[edit]

akin to politicalcompass, but for articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahfuzur rahman shourov (talkcontribs) 14:27, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

The Computer Desk might be a better place to ask. Software could analyze the frequency of certain words, and draw conclusions from that, but such a method is liable to miss subtleties, like satire. Many humans don't catch on to satire, either, so it's quite a task to expect a program to be able to understand it.
Then there's also the problem that the same political words ("radical", "progressive", "conservative", "democratic", "socialist",...) mean different things in different parts of the world.
Also, much political speech is rather indirect. In response to the recent college shooting in the US, I didn't hear anyone directly say "We need more guns in colleges and schools". What I heard instead was "We need to give these students the means to defend themselves". Asking a program to figure out from that last sentence that they are anti-gun control and hence politically conservative would be tricky. StuRat (talk) 15:11, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

@StuRat:it would be a forum, consisting of people, hobbyist analysts. universally accepted standards of wording will be used. as in, "conservative/liberal/progressive" in a global, neutral standard. example, a writing which is perpetrated as "progressive" by the proponent will be analyzed by this forum and checked whether political view is authoritarian or libertarian, and the percentage, whether economical view is capitalist or communist and so on. OP wishes for such a forum, so asks.

Why would people do something like that? It's a weird-a$$ activity (to do for free) Asmrulz (talk) 22:10, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Salvationists with articles[edit]

Are there any Salvationists who have an article for any reason other than being Salvationists? In pretty much all other denominations there is always an independently famous member. 2A02:582:C4C:1400:616A:FEDF:BEF1:A5AB (talk) 15:25, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Going through Category:English Salvationists gives us Audrey Brettle, Derek Foster, Gordon Lorenz, Wes Maughan, and Frank Smith. I'm sure a similar exercise can be carried out with the other sub-categories of Category:Salvationists. Tevildo (talk) 15:41, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Photo of Brigitte Kuhlmann[edit]

Does any photograph of Brigitte Kuhlmann exist? My quick search showed nothing. (talk) 16:12, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

There's a grainy B&W image at Rojomoke (talk) 16:18, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

First French-speaking king[edit]

Do we know who was the first king of Francia/France to be a native speaker of French rather than Frankish? --Lazar Taxon (talk) 16:25, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

You mean Old French? The original langues d'oïl.
Sleigh (talk) 16:51, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes. --Lazar Taxon (talk) 17:05, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
It must surely be Hugh Capet, assuming that all the previous kings of the Carolingian dynasty spoke Frankish natively. This book is rather old but confirms my suspicions - the Dukes of Paris (who succeeded the Carolingians as Kings of France) spoke French while the Carolingians always spoke Frankish. Apparently Louis IV of France and emperor Otto I spoke German together (according to the contemporary chronicler Flodoard). Presumably Louis V then also spoke Frankish. But Hugh Capet and Otto II did not have a common language, so Otto spoke Latin and it was translated into French (according to Richerus). Adam Bishop (talk) 20:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! And this confirms my suspicion that Charles the Bald and Gisla on the show Vikings shouldn't be portrayed as French-speakers. --Lazar Taxon (talk) 21:10, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Odo of France was a Robertian too - would he have spoken French? (talk) 22:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, I suppose he probably did...I can't find anything specific about what he spoke, aside from the book above that says the Robertians all spoke French. So by implication, Odo presumably spoke French, yeah. Adam Bishop (talk) 02:36, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

What records are there, if any, of nazi criminals who evaded or tried to evade capture by assuming Jewish surnames after World War II?[edit]

Thanks.Rich (talk) 23:06, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

October 4[edit]

Type of fallacy[edit]

Here's a type of fallacy I sometimes notice in public debate:

Person A: Studies show that people with green hair are statistically more violent than other people.
Person B: That's wrong. Bob from accounting has green hair, and he's not violent at all.

Is there a name for this kind of fallacy, when someone thinks they've disproved a generalization by pointing out an exception? Thanks! 2607:FCC8:87C5:100:78FA:8B26:2B8C:66C1 (talk) 00:54, 4 October 2015 (UTC)


September 26[edit]

Arabic paleography[edit]

Probably, I ask about a thing nonexistent, but is there something close to Bischoff or Thompson's paleographic works but on Arabic script? Especially I'm intersted in when and how additonal non-Arabic letters have been invented, or in other words the history of letters.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 18:26, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps these three volumes on "the Arabic manuscript tradition" by Adam Gacek. Lesgles (talk) 02:58, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Help with French translation[edit]

Could someone translate something in English into phonetic French for me? Thanks!Claire Anemone (talk) 19:38, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

  • /'kɛlkɘʃoz/ μηδείς (talk) 16:35, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
  • /il brilg; le tɔv lybrisijø sə ʒir ã vrijã dã la gwab/ —Tamfang (talk) 05:00, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
/jy 'filsi 'iŋgliʃ kɘ'nɪgɨt/! μηδείς (talk) 01:10, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Enough time has passed for spoilers, I think. First Medeis translated something; I quoted the beginning of a French version of Jabberwocky. —Tamfang (talk) 09:19, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Are you implyeeng zat zee fraunch espiqueeng chevaliers du San Graal du Python Monty ne méritent rien? μηδείς (talk) 01:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Quick Japanese Translation[edit]

Not sure if this is the place to ask this, but I need help translating two non Wikipedia Japanese articles to English. Well, not so much translation, but more or less what the articles are saying. There's only so much Google Translate can do. The two articles talk about Nine Hours, Nine Persons, Nine Doors and Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward

First article is really short, and I believe it mentions that for the release of Virtue's Last Reward, the developers made 999 free for a short time. This would be useful for the promotion section.

Second article is a bit longer. I had a hard time understanding this article, but I do believe it's talking about a game release party of the developers.

My apollogies if this is the wrong place to put this. If it is, then could you possibly point me to where I need to go. Thanks. Famous Hobo (talk) 19:34, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I think this is the correct place. The first article does say that in celebration of the release of VLR, Chunsoft made 999 free to play from 2012-02-02 to 2012-03-06. The second article is about a pre-launch press event for VLR on 20152012-02-15 starring Kotaro Uchikoshi (the director) and Mikie Hara (a gravure idol). It doesn't look like anything interesting happened. -- BenRG (talk) 05:23, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, that's exactly what I need. Famous Hobo (talk) 05:51, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

September 27[edit]


What is the meaning of Forthcoming? Chandelia16 (talk) 08:48, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Google is your friend.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 08:52, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Also Wiktionary --catslash (talk) 16:38, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Or -- (talk) 17:32, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Knightly address[edit]

Do other European languages have an equivalent to the convention of "Sir [name]" referring to knights? I'm curious, because it seems like in many cases the equivalents of "sir" and "mister" would be identical, for example Spanish señor. --Lazar Taxon (talk) 19:38, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

The Spanish Don/Doña is somewhat like Sir/Dame, for instance in requiring to be followed by the forename. Historically it was applied to members of the nobility. --rossb (talk) 22:25, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
I believe "Chevalier" might be used as a term of address in Francophone contexts relating to that qualification; similarly "Ritter" in Dutch and "Ridder" in German ones. See details within our article Knight. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 14:00, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
I think you mixed up German Ritter and Dutch/Flemish Ridder there. But as for forms of address, I'd say German "de:Herr" is the equivalent to "Sir". It has lost a bit more of its associations with knighthood, but then even in English I would usually address an unknown man as "Sir" as a form of courtesy. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:01, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
  • I tried looking at all the various different language articles linked to Sir Galahad and none of them called him monsieur or señor or Herr or gospodin Galahad. They all just called him Galahad (in the local variant) or simply Sir Galahad. I don't think giving the modern translation of the term of address sir in English actually addresses the OP's specific question. μηδείς (talk) 01:07, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

September 28[edit]

"Bed smart"[edit]

Is there a common way in English to express that a person is highly competent in sexual matters in a similar way to the term "street smart" - and like that one, used unisex and with rather positive connotations? --KnightMove (talk) 02:55, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

There's always the simple "good in bed". -- (talk) 03:39, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
"sheet smart"? -- (talk) 21:14, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
You could also consider "good between the sheets". JezGrove (talk) 17:54, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Commented literature[edit]

What options do we have regarding series of literary analysis of classical works? Is there such a thing as Penguin Books with notes, academic analysis, and a thorough introduction? Something that's more serious that Cliff's notes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llaanngg (talkcontribs) 09:38, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

A previous (short) thread on this topic is at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2008 May 23#Commented editions of English literature. The Norton Critical Editions are still, as far as I know, the closest thing to what you're talking about (at least in terms of a fairly extensive series rather than one-shot annotated editions). Deor (talk) 10:22, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
You might also check out Bloom's Guides, found in many libraries. Lesgles (talk) 23:39, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

"... attributed with a little odd sense of humor".[edit]

Is the sentence "He is attributed with a little odd sense of humor." grammatically and semantically correct? How could it be improved? --KnightMove (talk) 11:44, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

"Little" is the problem word in the above. If you want to say he has an odd sense of humour; "He has an odd sense of humor.". If you're trying to say not all of his humour is odd, "He has an occasionally odd sense of humor." would be clearer. - X201 (talk) 11:50, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. Would "... somewhat odd sense of humor" also work? --KnightMove (talk) 11:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
The claim is being made of the person referred to, which is exactly "he". --KnightMove (talk) 12:01, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
I parse that as trying to use the phrase a little odd attributively, which doesn't work. So, yes, somewhat odd is a way of saying what I guess was intended. --ColinFine (talk) 18:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
To specifically answer the posed question, the sentence is not semantically correct English. One does not say, "He is attributed with..." The correct usage is that the attributes come first and the individual is the object of the attribution. Here is the correct usage: A little odd sense of humor is attributed to him. Akld guy (talk)
No, that still fails the test adduced by ColinFine. "A little odd sense of humor" suggests his odd sense of humor is little, whereas, what it's trying to say is that his sense of humor is a little odd. I think I'd write "His sense of humor is said to be a little odd", or even just "His sense of humor is a little odd", but that's getting away from the original sentence structure perhaps too much. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
My answer only addressed the question of whether 'attributed with' was correctly structured, and my correct usage rephrasing was intended to answer that. The 'little odd' was adequately answered by Colin Fine. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I should have inserted my answer directly under the OP's question, then what I was driving at would have been clearer. Akld guy (talk) 23:44, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Quotes are attributed to the people who said them, so the verb choice or its usage is simply wrong. You could say he is credited with an odd sense of humour, or an odd sense of humour is one off his attributes. If you want to say "little" in this context then use the adverb slightly instead. μηδείς (talk) 01:01, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Spelling of parallel[edit]

I still struggle to remember how the word "parallel" is spelled. I know there's a double L and a single L but can never remember which goes first. Both "parallel" and "paralell" look right to me when I write them down (as any fule no, the latter is wrong). I usually end up Googling the word every time I want to use it, which is annoying.

Does anyone have some kind of mnemonic way to remember that the double L goes first? An 'I before E except after C' (except when it doesn't) sort of thing? -- (talk) 13:55, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

My problem with the word used to be misspelling it "parralel", obviated by remembering that the "ll" was an illustration of the word's meaning. Decades of practice using it has impressed the correct spelling in my grey matter, but I don't know of any "rule" (in English? Ha!) to reinforce it. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 14:05, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Note that "parallel" and "allele" come from the same root.[28][29] And remember that "parallel" has two parallel lines running through it, but not on the end. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:15, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
I actually struggled with the same thing as a kid (in German), and made up my own mnemonic (though not a generalizable rule). In German I used "alle Leute" schreiben es falsch" (everyone spells it incorrectly). In English, I guess, you could use "if all else fails", for example. (Or "all-electronic", "all elves help Santa", ...) ---Sluzzelin talk 17:59, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
"Alle Leute" is inspired. And I speak German so it works for me. Thanks! (And to everyone else for their suggestions.) -- (talk) 08:57, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
  • The first two ells in parallel are parallel. i figured that one out in 6th grade, not that I expect everyone to be so cllever. μηδείς (talk) 00:57, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
I also figured out how to capitalize the letter I around about the same age, not that I expect everyone to be so clever. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 07:04, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Llate develloper, eh? μηδείς (talk) 00:33, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
In the UK, 6th Grade would be around the age of 9, which is when WE STARTED SHOUTING IN ALL CAPS BECAUSE SESAME STREET TAUGHT US TO, WITH THEIR ABC SONG. 'ah-buh-cuh-duh-eh-fuh-guh' would have been better, considering uncials are more common. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 10:34, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Cllever American kids eschewed Sesame Street for The Ellectric Company. μηδείς (talk) 00:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
So they were all subject to ECT. How sad. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 22:00, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Why would there be 36 in (910 mm) in parallel? CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 12:21, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Oh, 'ell. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 13:14, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

September 29[edit]

Pre-war German paper - 2[edit]

The following is part of an original German text:-

"Wenn nun auch im Fall beliebig geformter Elektroden die (in Wirklichkeit vorhandenen) Anfangsgeschwindigkeiten sicher u. U. eine bedeutend größere Rolle spielen, aus bei symmetrischen Elektroden, so ist doch demnach der Langmuirsche Satz in der angegebenen Form rich ig."

Which I think translates as something like:

"Now, if in the case of arbitrarily shaped electrodes (of practical use) the initial velocities ???? play a significantly greater role than in the case of symmetrical electrodes, Langmuir's claim in the given form is therefore yet compelling ."

This translation doesn't actually make much sense in the context. It makes more sense (at least to me) if the word "initial" is replaced by the word "peripheral".

What does the abbreviation "u. U." mean?

What is the correct transliteration of the words "rich" in the original German, noting that the German for "Form rich" (wealthy) is "Bilden reich"? (talk) 09:54, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

"u. U." is "unter Umständen" (under certain circumstances), and the last part "rich ig" is missing a letter, it should be "richtig" (right, correct).
Otherwise your translation is not far off. Using mostly your wording, with some corrections, I would re-arrange the whole sentence to make it clearer: "Even though the (in reality existing) initial velocities under certain circumstances certainly play a significantly greater role for arbitrarily shaped electrodes than for symmetrical electrodes, the Langmuirsche Satz is therefore still correct as given."
--Tokikake (talk) 10:58, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Terrific. Thanks. (talk) 11:20, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

What does this word mean?[edit]

I see four instances of 'vide' in this document. what does it mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:18, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

It means "see" in Latin, (definition, and is used to mean the same thing as "See also" or "re:" in other contexts. It refers the reader to other text or documents which elaborate on the material which precedes it. --Jayron32 16:28, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
See List of Latin phrases (V). It means "see" (literally) or "refer to". Vide wikt:vide#Latin.
Wavelength (talk) 16:29, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

What has an imperative verb got to do in those four instances? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:39, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure I follow your question. The word means: "look at this". For example, when it says "Vide Notification No. 33/2014 dated 25th July, 2014", it is telling you to refer to the document "Notification No. 33/2014 dated 25th July, 2014" Every other use of "vide" is preceding some other document (notifications, orders, etc.) that you, the reader of this document, are supposed to refer to. --Jayron32 16:55, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Doesn't the use of the word mangle the grammar in those sentences? The word means 'see'. Can you replace those 'vide's with see and still make sense? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:02, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Absolutely you can. "See Notification No. 33/2014 dated 25th July, 2014" is perfectly grammatical English. --Jayron32 17:42, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
And it's even still imperative. shoy (reactions) 13:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

That would be grammatical as long as it is an imperative sentence with no main clause attached to it. What about the full sentence from the document? "*See* Notification No. 33/2014 dated 25th July, 2014, the forms for filing tax audit report have been revised." OR "The High Court of Bombay disposed of writ petition No.2492 of 2014 *see* order dated 25.09.2014 and directed the Board to look into the practical difficulties of the petitioners and take a just and proper decision in this matter." — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:57, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Name-dropping without any names[edit]

Is there a word for the following behaviour: "Yesterday I had lunch with a senior vice president of a large company, and he said that the local economy is..." "I talked with a close friend of mine, who is a Director of Medicine at a major hospital, and he said that the common cold normally lasts...". Appealing to famous people without naming them. --Pxos (talk) 18:23, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like a form of Argument from authority aka "appeal to authority". --LarryMac | Talk 19:48, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

"As" vs. "as if"[edit]

In one Andy Capp strip, Andy Capp and his wife Flo are returning home from a darts competition. Andy says to Flo: "I said 'Play as you've never played before', not 'Play as if you've never played before'." Now I understand the strip's meaning and all that, but I still have to wonder about the details of English grammar. What, exactly, is the exact grammatical difference? Don't bother explaining the strip to me. I already understand it. I'm interested in the exact grammatical details. JIP | Talk 21:03, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

It's the difference between "as" used as a conjunction meaning "in the same way that; according to what", that is a "real" comparison, versus "as if" meaning as though; in a manner suggesting; in mimicry of, suggesting an unreal equation. Wiktionary suggests kuten for the former and kään kuin ikään kuin or niin kuin for the latter, but I can't claim to understand the subtleties (or non-subtleties) of Finnish. Nevertheless, the examples I found seem to corroborate this distinction. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:19, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
You mean "ikään kuin", not "kään kuin". But anyway, I understand your explanation. Andy Capp meant Flo should have played in a way she had never played before, not played suggesting she had never ever played at all before. JIP | Talk 21:34, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Indeed I did, sorry (at least the link worked, but something (a letter) got lost in translation :-). Yes, that's what I meant! ---Sluzzelin talk 21:37, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
'Play as you've never played before' means he's exhorting her to play in an extraordinary way that will win the game, whereas 'Play as if you've never played before' means he's telling her to play incompetently, as a novice would. If he said the latter, it could be interpreted as instructing her to throw the game. The distinction is therefore that the phrases have opposite meanings. Akld guy (talk) 21:48, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Exactly. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 23:05, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
JIP explained that he already understood that, and wanted an analysis of the grammar, not of the meaning. --Trovatore (talk) 23:22, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
In regular English (well, the way I would say it, anyway), he would have said "Play like you've never played before". Adam Bishop (talk) 23:36, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Wavelength (talk) 23:57, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
JIP may well have understood the meaning, although his first language is probably not English and he did not expressly say he understood the difference, only that he understood the meaning of the strip, whatever that might mean. In any case, there may be readers here who do not comprehend the subtleties of the English language. Don't deny them the right to learn. If only one person learned the difference between the two phrases, it was worth it. Akld guy (talk) 00:07, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
In British English, at least, "Play like you've never played before." is ambiguous, and can mean either "Play as you've never played before." or "Play as if you've never played before.". Bazza (talk) 13:04, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
The second usage would only make sense if the player was being asked to help throw the match. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Or if the player was asked to sandbag. ---Sluzzelin talk 05:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Close kin to point shaving. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:31, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


When I was at the World Bodypainting Festival this July, I heard someone speaking in German and mentioning ÖBB, the national railways of Austria, as /Ø: be: be:/, with the sound of "Ö" as /Ø/, not as "O umlaut". Nevertheless, unlike my native Finnish, where the letter "Ö" is utterly separate and not interchangeable with the letter "O", I have understood that in German, it's not so much a separate letter than an inflected form of the letter "O". So do German native speakers pronounce the letter as /Ø/ or as "O umlaut"? JIP | Talk 21:55, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

See and hear Das deutsche Alphabet-Lied (German Alphabet Song) (1:39) on YouTube. —Wavelength (talk) 22:44, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Resident of Austria here. I don't know what /Ø/ sounds like, but I can confirm that it is spoken as O umlaut. --Viennese Waltz 07:57, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I think the OP meant how initialisms containing umlauts are pronounced. I never heard anyone say O-umlaut BB for ÖBB, O-umlaut PNV for ÖPNV etc, they say ÖBB, ÖPNV. Same is true of when you spell ordinary (non-abbreviation) words containing umlauts e.g. over the phone. I don't quite get the bit about interchangeability. Umlauts are never interchangeable with the respective base letter ("Gaste" instead of "Gäste" guests is always wrong), but they may be substituted with AE/OE/UE if technical limitations require it. Also, umlauts can variously be sorted with the base letter (i.e. ignoring the döts), as AE/OE/UE, as distinct letters after the base letter, or as distinct letters at the end (after Z), whereas all other diacritics are always ignored and sorted with the base letter. Asmrulz (talk) 15:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
The German Ö has two pronunciations: [ø] (closed) or [œ] (open). I understand that the Finnish ö is always pronounced [œ] (open). You might stumble upon the fact that in the full word "Österreich" the Ö is open, whereas in the abbreviation "ÖBB" it is closed. A German Ö that stands alone is pronounced [ø] (closed). --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 15:57, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Wait, Österreich pronounced with a short/open /œ/? I've only ever known it with a closed /ø:/. Fut.Perf. 16:52, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
You are right. wikt:en:Österreich has an /øː/ and the speakers pronounce it that way (except me). --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 23:45, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

September 30[edit]

French licensing statement[edit]

Please see the copyrights page for a certain website. Over at Commons, someone has told me, alternately, that (1) the page prohibits commercial use, and (2) that the page specifically permits commercial use. A couple of minutes ago, I asked him whether it mentions derivative works, but of course he's not yet replied. Since I'm trying to see whether the website's contents match our definition of a free license, would you please translate the parts of the page that would be helpful in deciding this? Nyttend (talk) 01:20, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

A possible source of help from a copyright policy end of things is WP:MCQ. I'll let someone who is more knowledgeable in French comment on the language issue. --Jayron32 05:48, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
à des fins d’enseignement […] permet aux enseignants d’inclure […] des articles means it's an educational-use-only license ("…for teaching purposes […] allows teachers to include […] articles"). Thus definitely not suitable for us. Fut.Perf. 05:59, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
MCQ help isn't needed, as I'm quite familiar with our copyright standards; I was solely trying to understand what their standards said, so my thanks to FPAS. Nyttend (talk) 13:22, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Do Scandinavians have a word for non-Scandinavians?[edit]

Do Scandinavians have a word for non-Scandinavians?--Yppieyei (talk) 08:05, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

A Finn here: I haven't heard any, but sometimes people do use the word "Europe" when they leave Finland for another European country that is not a Nordic Country (i.e. Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Finland). I believe that "the Britishers" also leave their Isles and "go to Europe" as well. But I couldn't say whether anyone really uses the term "European" in that sense – unless jokingly. --Pxos (talk) 11:59, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Norwergians and Danes call Germans "Tyskerne", if that's any use. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:11, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Well, Norwegians call Finns "Finnene", and Finland is, strictly speaking, not part of Scandinavia. May be that's the magic word? --Pxos (talk) 12:59, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
JIP might know; he's Finnish, and if I remember rightly, he travels a bit in countries to the west. Nyttend (talk) 13:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Once upon a time, when Finns went west, they became known as "Finnjävel". Can that be the word? A non-Scandinavian drunk who kills his buddy with a knife. At least the Swedish had a word, but I don't think it's very useful here. --Pxos (talk) 14:24, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't know of any Finnish term meaning "non-Scandinavian" or "non-Nordic". The only word that comes to my mind is "ulkomaalainen", but that just means "foreign". I'm not a native Swedish speaker, but I understand it to a very good degree, and I don't know of any such term in Swedish either. JIP | Talk 14:26, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Actually, the answer to the original question might be the same as the answer to my new question: Do people of North America (or the British Isles) have a word for "non-Northamericans", or "non-Britishers"? And, what's a "Scandinavian" anyway? --Pxos (talk) 14:31, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
A British person might describe a non-British person as a "foreigner". --Viennese Waltz 14:38, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
We usually call them 'immigrants'. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 15:13, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Hundreds of immigrants flock to Trafalgar Square every day, leave thousands of pounds in Britain, and when their holiday is over, they fly home. Bloody immigrants! --Pxos (talk) 15:16, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
(e/c) Where did you get that idea from? The question was about non-British people in general, not people living in the UK. --Viennese Waltz 15:18, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
This might turn into a joke, if we're not careful. "A Dane, a Swede and a Finn travelled to Newcastle. What did the locals call them?" I don't know the punchline but maybe someone does. --Pxos (talk) 14:51, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
"Potential goalies like, why aye man." Martinevans123 (talk) 15:25, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Or in general[edit]

Why are you asking about Scandinavians only? Let's put it universally: Are there: any nation, any language, and any word, meaning - in that language - a person not belonging to that nation? Really, English has the word "foreigner", but its reference is not on a national basis (because even a person not living in my neighborhood may be considered a "foreigner" from my point of view). HOOTmag (talk) 15:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
The word "gentile" means non-jew. (talk) 15:46, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Also see Goy in connection with non-Jew. Akld guy (talk) 21:12, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
A related example (but, again, not a nation) are the German-speaking people of the Swiss canton Valais who refer to all German-speaking Swiss from other cantons as Üsserschwiizer (outer Swiss). It's even mentioned in our article on Walser German. ---Sluzzelin talk 18:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I would guess many languages have a word specifically for people from another nation, but maybe I just think so because my own language Danish has it: udlænding. A similar English construction would be "outlander". Another word fremmed means foreigner in general or stranger. Danish doesn't have a separate word for non-Scandinavian or non-Nordic. Danes usually don't include Iceland and Finland in Scandinavia but include both in the Nordic countries. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:40, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I've marked this subthread as a separate question. First, "foreigner" is indeed such an example; just because it has other shades of meaning, that doesn't mean it doesn't have the one that was asked about. Another such word in English is "alien". Second, as I understand it the Greek and Latin words that give us "barbarian" derive from the concept that "foreigners can't speak our language, so when they talk it just sounds like bar-bar-bar-bar-bar"; and I've read that there are other languages with a word for foreigner that eymologically means "non-speaker", but I can't recall specifics to cite an example. -- (talk) 20:15, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
They turned that into a song: Bar-Bar-Bar-Bar-Barbara Ann. Went to a dance, Looking for romance, Saw Barbara Ann, So I thought I'd eat her pants ... . -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:17, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Alien? I feel Hurt. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:33, 30 September 2015 (UTC) ("is it coz I is Welsh?")
I presume (possibly recklessly) that all nations have a word for "foreigner", including the Scandinavian nations. I don't think that was what the OP was asking about though. I think that they were asking about was whether the Scandinavian nations distinguish between "foreigners that are still pretty much like us because they come from another Scandinavian nation" and "foreigners that come from further afield". The more general case would be "is there <<any group of nations>> that has a specific word for foreigners not from that group of nations?" I expect this would only occur where you have a group of nations with a clear group identity, and not necessarily even then. I don't think the British, for example, have such a word except for sticking "non-" on the beginning of whatever group they're referring to, e.g. non-European, non-Western, non-Anglophone, etc. (Unless you consider "Britain" as a group of nations rather than a nation, in which case it the answer would be "foreign"). Iapetus (talk) 11:33, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Anectodal: Many years ago, when living Down Under (for 20-odd years) my Austrian passport was embellished with a sticker reading “Alien” (possibly alien resident, I can´t remember). Unlike other Germanic imigrants to Anglo-Saxon shores I was highly amused.
As to the question by the OP: When - even longer ago -I briefly worked in Sweden, my "mates" at work frequently mumbled "jävla utlanninger". Which JIP my translate, it they so wish. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:28, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
As you might already have guessed, that translates to "bloody foreigners". JIP | Talk 05:41, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
The Maori people of New Zealand have a word in the Maori language for non-Maori people. Pakeha is a term for white-skinned immigrants or residents. It has in recent years been extended to refer to any non-Maori of any race or colour, such as Asians and dark-skinned individuals. Akld guy (talk) 20:54, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Palagi is a word used in Samoa that has similar meaning to Pakeha. Akld guy (talk) 21:05, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Haole is the equivalent in Hawaiian. Rmhermen (talk) 00:19, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
People from Yorkshire have been known to refer to anyone not born and bred in Yorkshire as "them bloody Pakis" (*) ... allegedly. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:22, 30 September 2015 (UTC) (* please insert xenophobic rant of your choice).
The Inuit use Qablunaaq or a variant to refer to all non-Inuit. Originally just a term for white people who were the first outsiders it now encompasses everybody. See Inuinnaqtun English Dictionary CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 00:10, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Here in Liverpool, UK, we refer to people not from Liverpool as 'woollybacks. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 06:56, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Gaijin appears to be the Japanese version. Akld guy (talk) 07:00, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Further examples might be found in this list of Digital Resources for The Other in World History. ---Sluzzelin talk 09:55, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Pre- WW1 German paper 3[edit]

In the following text:

Vernachlässigung anderer Strukturwirkungen berechtigt ist, zeigt die Rechnung selbst, und durch äußere Felder (die wir w. u. Einzuführen haben) kann die Dichte der Elektronen innerhalb der Bildkraftsphäre nur unwesentlich verändert werden.

What does w. u. stand for?

In googling I found it can stand for "wehrunwürdig", "Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien" and a few other things that cannot be appropriate, or possibly "Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen" ( = scientific research or scientific/academic tests/investigations/inquiry) which doesn't fit very well - seems redundant. (talk) 13:13, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Pretty sure it stands for "wie unten", meaning "as stated below". --Viennese Waltz 13:28, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Aha! That fits perfectly. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:22, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
It stands for "weiter unten", meaning "below". --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 15:37, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

October 1[edit]

The meaning of "outsouthern"[edit]

Would you please teach me the meaning of "outsouthern" in the following sentence? (talk) 07:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)dengen

  Carolyn Ellis, a bright, funny Lebanese woman from Mississippi who could 
  "outsouthern" me and is now chancellor of the University of Mississippi.---
  Bill Clinton, My Life, p.183.
English speakers sometimes use "to out-xyz" to mean "to be more xyz", so I guess Clinton is meaning "who could be more southern than me". JIP | Talk 07:35, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Clinton is saying that Ellis was able to exemplify or convey the cultural characteristics of the Southern United States better than he was. (The context may or may not make it clear exactly which of those characteristics he's thinking of. Perhaps it may refer to nothing more than her manner of speech.) See definitions 3 and 4 here. Deor (talk) 07:40, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
I believe this type of construction originated with outdo. Alansplodge (talk) 12:33, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Dr. Carolyn Ellis Statonis currently listed as Professor Emeritus, but had been provost and vice chancellor for Academic Affairs. List of Chancellors of the University of Mississippi suggests that she was never the full chancellor. -- ToE 12:58, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
He is saying that her mannerisms, probably including speech, are strongly Southern. This might be a "subculture" of the United States. See also Southern United States, Southern American English, Black Belt (U.S. region), Southern hospitality, and several other Wikipedia articles. Bill Clinton of course hails from Arkansas, which is considered one of the West South Central States. Bus stop (talk) 22:37, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
No, actually, what he is saying is that her mannerisms are even more Southern than his—and he has a reputation of having very strongly Southern mannerisms and speech. Out- nearly always has the connotation of not only "to be more ..." but "to be more ... than something that is already strongly ..." StevenJ81 (talk) 00:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Speak the speech, I pray you, as I pronounced it to you, trippingly on the tongue: but if you mouth it, as many of your players do, I had as lief the town-crier spoke my lines. Nor do not saw the air too much with your hand, thus, but use all gently; for in the very torrent, tempest, and, as I may say, the whirlwind of passion, you must acquire and beget a temperance that may give it smoothness. O, it offends me to the soul to hear a robustious periwig-pated fellow tear a passion to tatters, to very rags, to split the ears of the groundlings, who for the most part are capable of nothing but inexplicable dumbshows and noise: I would have such a fellow whipped for o’erdoing Termagant; it out-herods Herod: pray you, avoid it..

— Act III scene ii
In Middle and Early Modern English mystery plays the character of Herod was played as having a very loud voice. What Hamlet is saying here is, please don't be loud just for the sake of it; don't be even louder than how the Herod character is played.--Shirt58 (talk) 06:01, 2 October 2015 (UTC) "But in Pilates voys he gan to crie,/And swoor by armes and by blood and bones,/"I kan a noble tale for the nones,/With which I wol now quite the Knyghtes tale." Erm, or was it Pilate that had the loud voice? Ah, whatever.
Although see Termagant. Alansplodge (talk) 18:10, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Acquiescent v quiescent[edit]

What's the difference? (talk) 16:01, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I think that acquiescence refers to an individual making an affirmative decision to agree to something (or, to be quiescent about something). As a word, quiescence is more often used to refer to impersonal things (objects, events, etc.). But I'm kind of guessing on that. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
To become quiet vs. already in a quiet state.[30][31]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:40, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Quiescent is an important word in electronics. If it's said that the quiescent current in a device such as a transistor or radio tube is a certain value, the meaning is that that's the current under steady-state conditions with no input signal to the device. Akld guy (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
That fits with the notion of "quiet" as in "stable". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:07, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes Bugs, I was not disagreeing with your earlier post. Note that in the electronics sense, the stability is brought about by factors external to the device, not by choice of the device itself. Akld guy (talk) 22:50, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Although the –esc– element suggests a transition! —Tamfang (talk) 07:25, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
According to the Oxford English Dictionary: acquiescent = "Ready to accept something without protest or to do what someone else wants – from Latin acquiescent – 'remaining at rest'" whilst quiescent= "In a state or period of inactivity or dormancy – from Latin quiescent 'being still'". I hope this helps! JezGrove (talk) 18:55, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

why does the portugese word viciado means "addicted" ? what is his etymology?[edit]

this words sounds like the latin "vici" what means "I have won" (veni vidi vici)... and viciado has this word VICI at his beginnings.--Poker chip (talk) 16:17, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

It's probably from vitium, whence cometh the English word "vice". --Trovatore (talk) 16:47, 1 October 2015 (UTC) To be clear: That's my guess. I haven't actually checked the Portuguese etymology and I don't know a resource for that. I did look up the root of "vice" at --Trovatore (talk) 16:50, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
And what would be the right definition of "GTA- Vice City" if you would translate this to an other language? A city where everybody is Addicted to something? --Poker chip (talk) 16:58, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
No, the English word "vice" doesn't mean "addiction" specifically, though in most people's estimation it probably includes addiction. A "vice" is any habit that you should really try to get rid of. There's a moral component to the word, but less so than with "sin" — a sin is something inherently bad, whereas a vice might be just bad for you and OK for someone else. --Trovatore (talk) 17:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
This source confirms Trovatore's guess. A closer English cognate is vitiate. Marco polo (talk) 22:36, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
  • The normal Spanish for "drug addicted" is drogadicto, and Portuguese has the exact same term, although viciado em drogas is also used. μηδείς (talk) 18:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2[edit]

Gender of rivers[edit]

Do rivers have a gender in English? I am referring especially to River Severn#Literary and musical allusions where the Nile and the Severn seem to be male. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 11:32, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The Thames is sometimes characterized as 'Old Father Thames', of course. Not a reliable source, but there's an interesting blog on the subject of rivers and gender at [32] JezGrove (talk) 11:58, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
See also Ol' Man River. But such genders are limited to the literary/poetic register; in everyday speech, rivers are impersonal and neuter (it). StevenJ81 (talk) 15:06, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I don't think rivers are gendered in English in any formal grammatical sense. They're certainly not morphologically marked. But we do have e.g. Old man river for the Mississippi. There's also Queen_of_the_Mississippi_(ship), which sort of implies that the Mississippi is a populace or a country that can have a queen. SemanticMantis (talk) 15:07, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Contrast Anna Livia, female personification of the River Liffey in Dublin. jnestorius(talk) 17:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Freckles in Swahili[edit]

Does Swahili have a word for "freckles"? Khemehekis (talk) 22:58, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

This page on sw.wikipedia and this forum suggest "madoa ya kizungu"
"doa" = "spot", "madoa" is plural (see Swahili noun classes) >> "spots of the aimless wanderers"? See mzungu. ---Sluzzelin talk 23:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

October 3[edit]

German physics text[edit]

An old German paper on vacuum tubes has the following sentence:-

Diese Bedingung gilt für den Fall des thermischen Gleichgewichts, wo die mittlere Energie der Elektronen (bei gegebener Temperatur) sowie der mittlere Elektronenabstand im Verhältnis zu dem eben definierten Strom i ihren kleinsten Wert haben.

Which I think translates as something like:-

This condition applies in the case of thermal equilibrium, where the mean energy of the electrons (at a given temperature) and the ratio of average distance between electrons to the plane defined current i have their smallest values.

"i" of course being the standard symbol for electric current.

What I do not understand is the inclusion of the phrase "eben definierten" / "plane defined" or "exactly defined". Is there a better translation? (talk) 01:53, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

"Eben" can also mean "just", i.e. "a moment ago". So it means "just defined". Or it might actually be "oben" you're seeing, in which case it would mean "above defined". --Viennese Waltz 07:05, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
See the meaning of "eben" as an adverb in the wiktionary's first version (the newer revisions are too complex). --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 09:23, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
„Sowie“ should be translated as “as well as”. --Rôtkæppchen68 21:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't really think it makes any difference. --Viennese Waltz 21:58, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
It improves style. --Rôtkæppchen68 00:39, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, folks. I think "and" vs "as well as" depends on regional styles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:48, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Fatherland/motherland and the grammatical gender of the name of the country[edit]

In some languages one's homeland is called "fatherland", in others it's "motherland", in some, both are used, but one is used much more frequently. Is there a correlation between this fatherland/motherland usage with the grammatical gender of the name of the country (if there is one)? 731Butai (talk) 05:09, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Not sure, but in the UK, both fatherland and motherland were used interchangeably before the Great War, when fatherland acquired Germanic overtones. In support, see these 19th century English hymns: "O Lord, stretch forth Thy mighty hand / And guard and bless our Fatherland" and "Blazoned on our country's banner England bears the knightly sign: / Lord our Fatherland empower that endued with strength divine...". Alansplodge (talk) 22:17, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Names of countries do not have grammatical gender in English. The only nouns that have grammatical gender are those referring to people (and some animals) of a specific gender. Even then, the only implication of gender in English is to specify the third person singular pronoun. Marco polo (talk) 23:06, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Interesting that you've never heard of nations or ships, Marco Polo. μηδείς (talk) 23:28, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Pronoun type[edit]

There was a discussion in our local paper about the correct form for a sentence like "He was older than me/I". The paper had written "older than me" and was upbraided by a reader who claimed it should be "older than I", since this is short-form for "older than I am". That's obviously wrong, and I know that the "I"in "I am" is the subject pronoun. But can anyone tell me what the "me" pronoun is properly called, and fully justify why "me" is correct? Thanks.--Phil Holmes (talk) 11:52, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I would (naturally) agree with the newspaper's correspondent - "I" is strictly the correct pronoun in this sentence. See subject complement. "Me" is in the objective case, and (conventionally) the verb "to be" in English takes the subjective case. However, as you point out, most people would _say_ "He is older than me", even though it's technically in violation of the concords. Tevildo (talk) 12:23, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
I personally would say "It is I" because, as you say, "to be" takes the subject. However, that's not what we have here: there's that little word than between the verb and the pronoun, so I don't see that the subject complement counts in this case.--Phil Holmes (talk) 12:51, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
A valid viewpoint, which is shared by Shakespeare and Dr Johnson - see than. However, "than" can _arguably_ be considered a conjunction rather than a preposition; I think that, rather than saying that the sentences are "right" or "wrong", we can say that "He is older than me" leaves the writer open to criticism from pedants, and "He is older than I" leaves the writer open to a charge of unnatural usage. "He is older than I am" (in my opinion) should keep both sides of the argument happy. Tevildo (talk) 13:24, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
  • But then people like me will complain that it's too verbose, as well as pandering to people whose ideas of correct usage are mistaken or out of date. In particular, they are under the delusion that "than" cannot be a preposition. Here are three dictionaries that list it as one, in each case with a usage note supporting the point. -- (talk) 20:47, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Here's a post that cites some grammatical works on the topic. This is a much discussed question, and one can easily get a variety of opinions by Googling for "than I" "than me". Deor (talk) 14:05, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
  • See disjunctive pronoun. French uses moi in similar circumstances when "logically" je would be expected, and English has moved towards such a system. μηδείς (talk) 16:27, 3 October 2015 (UTC)


What does 'Ansakit' mean on Tagalog? Google Translate gave me nothing! Thank you. --ℳoræsk (talk) 15:20, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Hung or hanged?[edit]

A friend maintains that, in terms of hanging as a form of capital punishment, one can be "hanged" but not "hung", since "hung" implies only suspension rather than execution. Please help resolve a fairly pointless Saturday night argument. Alansplodge (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Your friend is correct as regards traditional usage. As the original Fowler's Dictionary of Modern English Usage succinctly puts it, "Past & p.p. hanged of the capital punishment & the imprecation; otherwise hung." Deor (talk) 22:22, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
(ec)"Hanged - put to death by hanging."[33] "Hung" as a word came along after "hanged", but "hanged" was retained in legal jargon. I like to compare the usage with what happens when a batter hits a fly ball that is caught for an out. Baseball jargon is that the batter "flied out" - one could argue that the ball itself flew out, but the batter flied out. One could say that the rope was hung on the gallows, and the man was hanged. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:25, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
The traditional way to remember it is: "Pictures are hung, but men are hanged". JezGrove (talk) 22:30, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Unless you're Robert Mapplethorpe, in which case you can be really well hung. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:34, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Or the line from Blazing Saddles - Charlie: "They said you was hung!" Bart: "And they was right!" ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:17, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you all. Seen off again! Alansplodge (talk) 23:50, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

October 4[edit]


September 26[edit]

Birth date of actress Marjorie Lord[edit]

While editing the Marjorie Lord, I encountered a discrepancy about her year of birth. The article originally had July 26, 1918, as her birth date in both the text and the infobox, but no citation was given for that date. In my research, I found her birth year as 1922 (no date listed) in The World Almanac Who's Who of Film and her birth date as July 16, 1922, in The Film Encyclopedia. I edited the article so that it shows the 1922 date (with citation) as an alternate date.

Do any of you who are reading this question know of a valid source that cites July 26, 1918, for her date of birth? Eddie Blick (talk) 16:17, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

The census records at are only available to paying members, so you'll have to take my word on this unless you can find it on a free site: The 1930 US census for Marjorie Wallenberg (parents George and Lillian, all living in San Francisco) indicates her age as 11, as of the date the census sheet was filled out, April 8, 1930. Hence, a birth year of either 1918 or 1919. The 1920 census sheet, filled out on January 2, 1920, gives her age as "1 and 5/12", which indicates a birth year of 1918 and a birth month of either July or August. The California Birth Index says July 26, 1918, mother's maiden name Edgar. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:56, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I will delete my references to 1922. I appreciate your help. Eddie Blick (talk) 20:08, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

September 27[edit]

Vinyl Records.[edit]

I collect vinyl records, old (1960s-90s) as well as new pressings of contemporary bands too, but I notice a difference in the sound quality in old and new vinyl, particulary in the vocals. In the older records, the vocals sound more direct, as if the singer is singing directly into my speakers, and everything sounds more vibrant, but in the newer records, the singer sounds more 'distant' and the instruments sound a bit tinny. So my question is:

Is there is a difference in the recording methods at the studio that explain the vocal disparities, and if so, what decade/year did this change take place?

Thank you. --Pofatyuoopol19 (talk) 08:07, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

There are two possible mechanisms here. The first is the Loudness war, the tendency of studios to release tracks with excessive Dynamic range compression so that they sound louder at the expense of audio quality. This is more an issue with CDs (and other digital formats), but it did exist with vinyl recordings. The second is the introduction of the inferior "Dynaflex" vinyl record (lower density and a high percentage of recycled vinyl) by RCA Victor in the 1970's - see Gramophone record#Vinyl quality. Tevildo (talk) 12:58, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
As an avid vinyl collector, I can also add that many modern vinyl pressings are not cut directly from the master recordings, but rather created using a digital track. I have found there to be a wide range of quality in modern vinyl. Some artists take great care to ensure a solid product with excellent sound, whereas others just get the record on the market to satisfy demand with little regard for fidelity. I will say, based on my experience, some of the best sounding vinyl records are from the late 1970's to early 1980's, just before the era of the compact disc. 10draftsdeep (talk) 15:58, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

September 28[edit]

What's the name of this movie?[edit]

I saw this movie several years ago. I guess the movie should be from 60s or 70s. Also, I guess the movie be made in France, Italy or German (but not USA). I just remember a few scenes, I hope it would be enough. The movie is about two buddies that carry a chair with them. They think that a treasure is embedded inside the chair, so they are very protective about it. At the end, they discover that the chair was not the one they expected (there is no treasure inside it). After realizing this, one of them become insane, he still believes that the chair contain a treasure and still don't want to put it away. In the last scene of the movie, he throw the chair away and pretend that he is ill, so people come around them and threw dime at them, so this way, they become reach. I remember another scene of the movie. In that scene, while they are hungry and starving, they enter a party, one of them is able to get some food but the other not. He demands his friend to let him eat from his food, but when he sees that how messy he is eating, he says "I'm not hungry" or something similar. This may not be an important scene, but this is what I remember from the movie. I hope it would be enough for you to recognize the movie I am looking for. Thank you. (talk) 00:40, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Possibly The Twelve Chairs? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:12, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Looking very familiar, I think that's the movie I'm looking for. Thank you very very much! (talk) 01:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

'Cool Britannia'[edit]

During the 1990's, did ‘Cool Britannia’ portray itself as a victory of style over substance? Was there much meaning behind Cool Britannia or was it all superficial? --Pofatyuoopol19 (talk) 09:53, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

"Cool Britannia" was a label given to a style of music that barely existed in itself. The groups and artists that get lumped together under its banner are as disparate as the 18 - 40 year olds at any one time in the UK could be. At the "left-wing" end you had the Manic Street Preachers, Pulp and Blur, while you could argue that Oasis was further to the right politically but even that's a matter of opinion, the Gallagher brothers being famously apolitical. So insofar as it could be anything beyond a label, I would argue that it was only Tony Blair's attempt at hijacking it that attempted to give it any depth or meaning. Mind you the music was bloody good. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:09, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't know that it portrayed itself as anything, since fashion movements are not autonomous beings with sentience or sapience. It also wasn't, strictly speaking, a musical genre (the musical genres in question would be things like Britpop or girl groups or indie rock, etc. Cool Britannia was more of a fashion movement than a musical genre. Other fashion movements would be things like hippie chic, which like Cool Britannia recalled the American 60's fashion sense. --Jayron32 13:18, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
The Stuckists would certainly think that the "Cool Britannia" YBAs met that description.--Shirt58 (talk) 09:28, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
You are wrong. The YBAs were never part of the Cool Britannia scene. --Viennese Waltz 09:31, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
♪♫ They all go hand in hand, hand in hand through their artlife ♫♪.. well, at least according to Wikipedia, that is.--Shirt58 (talk) 10:10, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

America (Fuck Yeah)[edit]

Who performed the song America (Fuck Yeah) in the movie Team America: World Police? 2A02:582:C5A:4300:186A:139:EE64:9383 (talk) 14:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

DVDA (band) - that is, Trey Parker on vocals, Matt Stone on bass, and other members of the team on other instruments. Tevildo (talk) 16:53, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

September 29[edit]

Identify music video[edit]


I'm trying to track down a music video from the late nineties. I don't know the group name or the title of the song. All I can remember is that it involves people dancing in a basement, a couple of rottweilers barking and mabye cops? Also, the genre is R&B, the group maybe British? It's all a blur though.

Thanks for any help. (talk) 05:44, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

  • I wouldn't have classed it as R&B, but it does bring to mind Setting Sun from The Chemical Brothers. The video did have policemen and rottweilers, and dancing, albeit at a late-night outdoor rave rather than a basement, but looking at the video again, it does look a bit like a basement. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 00:20, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Definitely not Setting Sun. But since you brought up Chemical Brothers, the overall tone of the clip was more akin to Block Rockin' Beats (or Blue Boy's Remember Me): dark, at night, indoors etc. (talk) 09:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Never mind, found it. It's Freak Me by Another Level. Was in my mind for years. (talk) 09:17, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Yup, dangers of late-night editing:) Was thinking as I hit the sack that chances are that Setting Sun was too recognizable and you wouldn't have said R'n'B for it. Glad you found the right one. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 15:12, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Close the door ![edit]

A pet peeve of mine is that in many TV shows and movies I've seen, somebody opens a house door, walks inside, and doesn't bother closing it. There's no good reason why it would have been left open. Why does this happen ? Is the "close door" instruction not included in the script ? Is that because it would distract from whatever else is happening ? Is anybody actually in charge of ensuring that doors are closed, similar to a "script continuity" position ? StuRat (talk) 22:50, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I actually did not find this among TV Tropes' door tropes. So, that leaves us with two possibilities: Either I didn't spot it. Or you must now register there as a contributor and fight for it (or it's listed elsewhere, or it's not a trope at all, and you lose :-) ---Sluzzelin talk 23:06, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Where the action is all about someone "bursting in", or turning up unexpectedly, or somehow entering the scene in a significant way, it's their sudden arrival that's the important thing. They can't walk through walls, so they have to open the door; but once they've arrived, the action moves on immediately. The purpose of their presence is the next thing the audience wants to know. They don't want to see actors engaging in mundane things like closing doors or windows, going to the toilet, cooking meals, paying bills, or waiting for stuff to happen, such as slow internet connections; divorces becoming final; DNA test results (which may take weeks or months in RL but come back the same day in the movies), and so on. That's why people attending court always seem to be able to drive right up to the very front entrance without any traffic, just leave their car there without worrying about a parking meter or No Parking signs, and bound up the steps; whereas in real life, there wouldn't be parking available for maybe some blocks away from the courthouse, and they might have to drive around a few levels before they find a park, then get out and walk however far it is to the courthouse. All that actual reality simply wouldn't work in a film or TV show.
In some cases, the person coming in to the house or room carefully closes the door behind them because it's an important part of the plot that they do that (e.g. they don't want anyone outside to know they're there, because they're doing something sneaky; or they're having a conversation that must remain very private). But where it's not important, then ... it's not important. If you watch programs with an eye to how closely they match reality, I'm afraid you're bound to be perpetually disappointed. And paradoxically-named "reality tv" is the most absurdly unrealistic of all. People watch this stuff precisely because it's not the same as their humdrum lives; it's an escape from reality. There's no invisible orchestra following us around and punctuating our daily lives with a lush music score, so why should there be one in tv/film? Our lives aren't conducted for only an hour a day between 5 and 6 pm, so why should a TV show be like that? These sorts of questions all miss the point, Stu. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 00:13, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps I should add that we can then see the door left open in the rest of the scene, which is why it's so annoying. I wouldn't mind so much if they were shown opening the door, then they were inside with the door closed. BTW, is "find a park" Aussiespeak for "find a parking space" ? StuRat (talk) 03:12, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
If they clearly left the door open when they came in, but it was a short time later shown closed although there was nobody else there who closed it, wouldn't that strike you as odd? Unless the plot called for an unseen actor doing spooky things, and the closing of door itself was a plot point, that would be a glaring continuity error, as serious as entering the room wearing a suit but in the next shot wearing pyjamas or something. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't expect them to show every trivial event happen on screen. I would just assume there was 30 seconds edited out, where they closed the door. On the other hand, a door just hanging open during the entire scene, for no reason, is glaring. One of the characters might just as well have forgotten to put his pants on that day. StuRat (talk) 14:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
You assume that other people are bothered by this. The fallacy you face is that your unique and personal experience is universal. The evidence that it is not universal, and is instead peculiar to you is that the thing that bothers you continues regardless of your personal discomfort. In other words, if being bothered by sitcom characters not closing doors was significant enough to prevent viewers from watching commercials during sitcoms, then the sitcom showrunners would insure that it didn't happen, since viewers would turn away in droves because open doors would bother them, and ratings would plummet, and only shows which deliberately closed doors would remain on the air to collect advertising dollars from viewers who watched commercials. Because shows that don't bother closing the door persist despite your singular, personal discomfort at such an occurance, can ONLY mean that the discomfort you feel is not a human universal, but a peculiarity to yourself. That means, there is no reliable, referenceable answer to your query, because it is not a human universal, but a singular, unique personality trait to yourself, and thus no one actually notices, much less cares, to write about the phenomenon. For that very reason, your question of "why do sitcoms do <whatever> is wholly unanswerable, except to state that <whatever> is inconsequential for anyone not you enjoying the sitcom, and that's all that needs to be said. --Jayron32 06:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I recall a scene early in Bull Durham, when Crash and Nuke walk outside to have a "discussion". The door, which has a glass pane, is left open. Crash challenges Nuke to hit him in the chest with his fastball. Nuke fires the ball, misses Crash, and the ball shatters the now-closed door. Soon after, they go back inside - and the door is open again. Maybe someone closed and then opened the door at opportune times, but we didn't see it on film. But it served the plot. Also, open doors are often a plot device, as it allows an eavesdropper to hear a conversation, or at least part of one, from which the snoop might or might not draw the right conclusions. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:34, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
A door that was left open being now closed or vice-versa falls into the category of continuity errors, and there are websites that tracks those. A door being left open for no apparent reason to enable eavesdropping is just poor writing, in the same category as movies or TV shows which require lots of coincidences to work (like MacGyver always happening to have just what he needs, handy, at all times). StuRat (talk) 13:45, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
"would insure that it didn't happen" ? Maybe they would ensure that it didn't happen, but I find it unlikely they would take out an insurance policy to cover the case where it happens. :-) (And yes, I do realize "insure" is sometimes used to mean "ensure" in the US.)
I made no claim it was a universal annoyance. And the question of whether or not anyone has the responsibility to check that things like "close the door" are added to scripts is certainly answerable; whether or not you can answer is another Q entirely. Also, while I doubt that the door issue alone turns off viewers entirely, it likely adds to the perception of "low production quality", which can turn people off. But, the Nielsen ratings aren't likely to tell them that, so they may be unaware of the issue.
Also, TV and movies aren't solely about making money. Some do still view them as artistic endeavors and attempt to make the highest quality product they can, whether or not that affects the bottom line (probably more true of foreign and independent productions). StuRat (talk) 13:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I find it mildly annoying, but not as odd as actors not saying goodbye before hanging up the phone. Or any chitchat at all. Sometimes not even a hello at the start - just exposition. I understand the need to trim out extraneous stuff (like closing doors), but it becomes jarring to see actors behave so differently from real people. (talk) 14:01, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I liked the approach they took on Parker Lewis Can't Lose. Say Parker walked from his class to his locker and then had a conversation. They would show the walk, but put it in fast motion, as nothing eventful happened along the way. StuRat (talk) 14:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Your left-brainedness is showing, Stu. Don't worry, I can empathise. But not to that degree. Suddenly speeding up something unnaturally just to make it occupy a shorter time on the film, rather than removing it entirely, is loopy. Imagine the makers taking that approach with Gone With the Wind or War and Peace. It would be 98% people zipping around doing stuff that was irrelevant to the main story, which the makers didn't really want you to see anyway.
Imagine telling a joke with that approach: Three men entered a bar in downtown Madrid, the capital of Spain, the southernmost country of Europe, which has returned to a system of monarchy after years of civil war and dictatorship. First the Englishman, who held the door open for the Frenchman, who entered but just let the door close in the face of the Russian, who then had to open the door himself and then come in. They walked down the small flight of stairs, covered in carpet of a green-brown colour with strange yellow and violet flecks, which helped to disguise dirt but left a lurid effect. They approached the long wooden bar, made of mahogany from timbers felled in Corsica, the birthplace of Napoleon, who once invaded Spain. The bar was being attended by three barpersons, 2 men and a woman, although the latter could easily have been a female impersonator, it's so hard to tell these days. They went over to the second man, second from their left that is, but first from the perspective of the barpersons. They said "Hi" (in Spanish of course, but I'm rendering their speech in English because this is an English-language joke). He said "Hello, what can I do you for?", smiling wryly at his mini-joke (which was also spoken in Spanish; see previous explanation). Then, before any of the men had a chance to place their orders, the barman noticed the three of them - of different nationalities, not that he knew that, or cared, but he did notice none of them looked typically Spanish, as he might normally have expected in his place that was not often patronised by tourists - all had monkeys sitting on their shoulders, and he asked "What are those monkeys doing on your shoulders?".... And so on.
Your audience is now fast asleep or has drifted away. A competent story teller gets to the point, omitting all irrelevant detail, giving only such detail as has a place or a point in the story; Three men entered a bar. The barman noticed they all had monkeys sitting on their shoulders and asked why .... -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 23:01, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
You know what is really annoying? Someone who starts a joke and doesn't deliver the punchline. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 00:34, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

September 30[edit]

Spray-bottles used by actors[edit]

In several old cartoons I've seen, actors about to appear on the stage or singers about to sing take a small bottle out and spray a fine mist into their mouth, presumably something that will make it easier for them to speak clearly and project their voice. I'm sure this small hallmark of luvviness has been played for laughs more than once. What's in those bottles? -- (talk) 10:44, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Probably breath spray. Staecker (talk) 11:46, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
More probably Vocal spray, used to lubricate the vocal cords rather than perfume the breath. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 13:05, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
The Wikipedia stub is pretty useless. If you Google "vocal spray" you'll learn how to make your own.--Shantavira|feed me 14:14, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Chloraseptic was pretty popular at the TV station I worked. No itching, coughing or squeaking, but it can make you drool, if you're careless. I don't think that brand was around in "the olden days", but generic phenol was. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:32, October 1, 2015 (UTC)
According to the 171st Nancy Drew novel, some opera singers put mentholated water in their nozzles. Take it with a grain of salt, though, because unlike books 167, 168, 169, 170, 172 and 173, Wikipedia doesn't recognize Intrigue at the Opera. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:06, October 1, 2015 (UTC)

The Beatles' Decca audition[edit]

I was reading your article about The Beatles' Decca audition and I have a question. It states that "Manager Brian Epstein made numerous trips to London to visit record companies with the hope of securing a record contract but was rejected by many, including Columbia, Pye, Philips, and Oriole." If this is the case, why has Decca been singled out for notoriety if all of these other labels have rejected the Beatles too? Surely Pye, Columbia, Philips and Oriole have also made "one of the biggest mistakes in music history" too? --Yonglingtonshire (talk) 14:15, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

I think it's a combination of (a) as the article states, the band actually auditioned for Decca, whereas the other labels presumably rejected them after discussions with Epstein only; and (b) the famous "guitar groups are on the way out" quote has survived, whereas any comments that may have been made by the other labels have not. --Viennese Waltz 14:34, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Quantico (Tv Series)[edit]

I would just like clarification as to why in the brief description for this show on the Wikipedia page, it lists the show, Quantico, as " an Indian television thriller series.." when this show was produced by ABC and is filmed in North American cities? The fact that the main actress is Indian, does not make this show an "Indian television series". — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:40, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

What you saw was the article after this edit. It was (at best) a test edit and has now been reverted. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. MarnetteD|Talk 14:43, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
According to Wikipedia, the main actress/"leading role" is American Aunjanue Ellis, and Chopra is the young female lead (the ingénue, if you're into crossword puzzles). Maybe still "main" in starpower (audiences like young females). If she's the "face of the show", it makes sense that someone might want to appropriate the whole package, but that doesn't make it appropriate. Quantico is more American than apple pie, by this production-based logic. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:26, October 1, 2015 (UTC)

October 1[edit]

Classical music without rubato (does it exist?)[edit]

I've just learned that the term for the loose and creative interpretation of rhythm is "rubato". I would like to know if there is any classical music that is completely free of rubato, or notable for its relative lack of rubato. Is there any classical music that will more or less sync with a metronome? I guess the difficulty is that the degree of rubato is decided by the conductor and performer, but then I am aware that composer's did leave some indication as to how to play their pieces. (My motivation for asking this is to find classical music that I might enjoy, since I realise I find rubato offputting. I'm quite happy with syncopation and other types of rhythmic creativity, but I like all the instruments to hit that rhythm, whatever it is, RIGHT on the nose.) Thanks. I'llAskTheQuestionsHere (talk) 04:24, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I would have thought most marches would be pretty consistent tempo-wise, as would most pieces designed to be danced to: see Dance forms in classical music. Some familiar examples might be Strauss's Radetzki March, Cinderella's Waltz from Prokofiev's Cinderella Suite, Revel's Bolero or Fauré's Pavane. --Nicknack009 (talk) 06:57, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
IANAMusician (well, not a good one), but I listen to "classical" (in the broad sense) daily. To my subjective observation, Baroque music is often strict in tempo: consider, for example, fugues and other works by J S Bach. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 13:54, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Right, I think Canon_(music) also tend to be fairly strict in tempo. OP may like the structure and this neat illustration of how Bach's Crab Canon fits together with itself on a Moebius strip - [34]. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Bad Bank (film)[edit]

how is this possible that this movie here has no rating and no article? there is also no stream available in the www.. --Poker chip (talk) 23:03, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

How do you know the movie exists? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:43, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Is it this movie [35] listed at SemanticMantis (talk) 03:17, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I saw the movie at the market --Poker chip (talk) 20:34, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2[edit]

Is That True?[edit]

On reports they say that Justin Bieber is flirting with Ariana Grande........Is That True??Chandelia16 (talk) 06:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Maybe. Is your source a reliable source? See WP:RS. Tabloids and gossip columns sometimes give correct info, sometimes they just found a nanny or housekeeper who's willing to tell stories to the press. Other related info at celebrity, cult of celebrity, Celebrity_worship_syndrome. SemanticMantis (talk) 14:58, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

October 3[edit]

Identifying a celebrity[edit]

Please help me ID the celebrity on the right[36]. I think that's Steve Buscemi on the left, but I'm not sure.731Butai (talk) 06:02, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Angelina Jolie. --Viennese Waltz 06:43, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Is Clint Mansell rich from Requiem for a Dream Soundtrack?[edit]

The piece Lux Aeterna (song) (originally composed for the movie Requiem for a Dream) has been ubiquitous ever since it was used in the trailer for The Two Towers back in 2002 (and possibly even before then). Around the same time, it was sampled in a song by Lil Jon & the East Side Boyz. Even now, you hear it in sporting events and movie trailers and on the TV show America's Got Talent.

What I want to know is: who's getting rich from the royalties for this song. I would love it if Clint Mansell (himself), the song's composer was compensated, but I realize he may not own the rights. Has Mansell ever been interviewed about the popularity of this song?

I did a Google search for Mansell royalities and Mansell interview and didn't find anything.--Captain Breakfast (talk) 07:02, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Just going from what I know of him (I'm more familiar with his early work with Pop Will Eat Itself), he is more likely to have made his money from the film scores than from PWEI! As for interviews, he is a self-acknowledged recluse and doesn't give interviews. I have to say thank you for asking this question as I never knew about his film work, and I've learned something myself from researching this composer. It's always good to see someone from your old home town making good! --TammyMoet (talk) 12:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Full Names[edit]

What is Little Mix's members full name? But actually I know the full name of Perrie Edwards but I just want to know if I'm correct. Thank You. And A.S.A.P. please......Chandelia16 (talk) 11:07, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Did you look at our article Little Mix? It's in the first sentence. Rojomoke (talk) 11:46, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

No I mean with their second names like for Taylor Swift, Taylor Alison Swift.Chandelia16 (talk) 12:52, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

That is generally referred to as a person's middle name. That might help with your Googling. Dismas|(talk) 14:02, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

October 4[edit]

Music by Charlie Parker[edit]

I was searching for a song I down loaded some time ago, and found it in Google that a version of the song "Summertime" was written by Charlie Parker. But when I looked in at the list of songs by him it was not listed, Why is that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:47, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Instant replay booth location[edit]

The Clemson-Notre Dame college football game is on the TV right now. Some minutes ago, there was a disputed call, and while the replay officials were deciding what to do, the cameras turned to the ESPN play-by-play announcers: their booth was immediately above the fans (the base of the booth was a wall behind a row of fans, whose heads were just below the booth's floor), and the replay officials were adjacent to the TV guys, so they too were literally just a few feet away. Is this a normal location for this booth? I'd expect the replay officials to be separated from the crowd by much more than about ten feet, for example, to protect them from tomato-throwers. Instant replay in American and Canadian football says that plays in NCAA games are reviewed from a "secure booth in the press box"; the scene didn't appear secure and didn't appear to be in a special press box, but that section isn't cited and perhaps I misunderstand the typical location of a press box. Nyttend (talk) 02:56, 4 October 2015 (UTC)


September 27[edit]

Namibian Rugby Team[edit]

I was watching a Rugby World Cup game, and I noticed that the vast majority of the Namibia team are white. Simple question: why? --Pofatyuoopol19 (talk) 08:10, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Rugby union in Namibia explains that, as with neighbouring South Africa, Rugby Union is particular popular among the country's white population - so obviously that's the pool from which international players will be drawn. Compare that to the Namibia national football team - judging from player's surnames and photos on Google images, the ethnic origins of the country's association football players is much more in line with the country's demographics. -- Finlay McWalterTalk 09:35, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
One possible clue is that this is evidently a Rugby union team. There are two variations on the Rugby game (the other is Rugby league). For historical reasons, rugby league has always been a working class sport - where rugby union was the preferred variation in expensive private schools and amongst richer players. As a guess, I'm betting that the more well-off people who attended private schools in Namibia tend to be predominantly white - which may explain this bias in the team. SteveBaker (talk) 13:42, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
I doubt it. You're right when you say that, historically, League has been a working class sport in the UK, whereas Union has been more middle/upper class. However, Rugby League is very much more a UK sport, and Union a sport exported from the UK to many former colonies. Hence Union is played much more widely than League: I doubt League is played much at all in Namibia (although searching for evidence of this brings up lots of Rugby Union Leagues...). And as an exported "colonial" sport, it's played much more widely by ex-colonials (i.e. white players). As was said earlier, Association Football tends to be the sport of choice of the non-colonial (i.e black) residents - partly because it has fewer requirements in terms of infrastructure. For example, you can use jumpers for goalposts.--Phil Holmes (talk) 16:41, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
You're probably right about the lack of Rugby league in Namibia, but see Rugby league in Australia which starts with the words "Rugby league football is one of the most popular sports in Australia". Apparently it is also the national sport of Papua New Guinea. Alansplodge (talk) 22:03, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
AU may be a bit of an exception - they have Rugby league and union, Association football, Australian rules football that are all very popular, and even some American football. I don't know of any other place that supports so many rugby-ish variants. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:00, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
We're an exceptional country, in all the ways that matter to the right people. Besides, we need something to argue to the death over at the pub.  :) -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:58, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
No doubt fighting over which game is called football. Hack (talk) 09:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
That would be the one. Me, I don't care what anyone calls anything. Mainly because the opinions of those who support any code other than the real football are not worth considering in the first place. :) -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:07, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
As a side note, World Rugby doesn't concern itself with nationality in the same way as, say, FIFA or the International Olympic Committee. You only need to have lived three years in a country to qualify for the national team, and some of the richer teams collect players from around the world, regardless of nationality and ethnicity. Namibia doesn't seem to have any non-Namibian players (a few are marked as South African, but only because they were born during South African occupation), but Japan, for example, has quite a lot of white and Polynesian players from overseas, chiefly from New Zealand. Smurrayinchester 09:03, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
The majority of the Japan team are Japanese citizens though. It's not clear but there may actually be more non-citizens on the Australian team than on the Japan team. Hack (talk) 09:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
An interesting point is that per [37] (in reference to the whole 31 player squad), Samoa actually has the highest number of players who weren't born in Samoa, although many may be Samoan citizens. Not sure what percentage, but it wouldn't be that surprising if many of them also spent a big chunk of their early life outside Samoa. Tonga is similar.

Largely because of the significant number of English born players, Wales is third. (There's a mistake in that source, Ross Moriarty appears to be correctly listed but was born in England, not Wales which makes more sense given the list is supposed to be those born outside the country they represent.) A seperate Welsh citizenship doesn't exist, so Wales will be much further down if you're looking at citizenship.

Japan has more foreign born players than Australia, and since only one of them qualifies under the parent rule, the rest qualifying under residency and Japanese nationality law#Naturalization can I believe be somewhat difficult or rare, I wouldn't be surprised if none of them except the parent rule one are citizens.

Of course, since Australian nationality law#Citizenship by birth isn't guaranteed in Australia since 1986, it's not certain Australia have fewer non citizens, particularly if we assume none of the foreign born players aren't citizens. Then again, it wouldn't be surprising if Dean Mumm, Stephen Moore (rugby union), Will Skelton, Joe Tomane are citizens. And I don't think it's really that likely that any of the Australian born players aren't citizens (noting that if they spent their childhood until age 10, they would be citizens).

Namibia BTW does have 2 players who were born and raised in South Africa according to that article, Louis van der Westhuizen (rugby union) (not Louis van der Westhuizen) born in Windhoek and Renaldo Bothma born in Alberton, Gauteng, although again, this doesn't mean either aren't Namibian citizens. These are seperate from the two born in Walvis Bay before 1994 or any born before independence in 1990.

Although NZ is another country often criticised for taking players from the (other) Pacific Islands, there are currently only 5 who weren't born in NZ, only 3 who were born in one of them. Jerome Kaino has lived in NZ since early childhood, Malakai Fekitoa and Waisake Naholo came in their teens with rugby scholarship. My impression is that this is actually often the case. Many of the Pacific Island players in NZ are actually born in NZ. Of those who aren't it isn't uncommon they spent a big chunk of their childhood here. Of the rest, many of them come here for their later schools years, perhaps on a rugby scholarship. (So while the allure of playing for the All Blacks, and the way this exacerbates the problems the small, somewhat poor Pacific Island countries face in coming up with a decent side may be understandable, it's a little simplistic to suggest it's simply a case of NZ stealing the best talent.)

Note, barring a few possible rare exceptions (children of diplomats or those born on a ship or aircraft or those who renouncedtheir NZ citizenship), anyone currently playing for NZ now who was born in NZ would be a citizen. Although New Zealand nationality law#New Zealand citizenship by birth is no longer guaranteed in wider circumstances, that has only applies since 2006. Of course you can be born in NZ and have NZ citizenship without spending more than a few weeks here. Theoretically, other those weeks at birth, I guess you could play for the All Blacks without ever having stepped on NZ soil again, although the NZRU's general expectation you play rugby in NZ make that unlikely.

However as mentioned at the beginning, this is in reference to all players named in the 31 player squad. If you look at people who are regularly part of the team, particularly in key matches, you may find differing numbers and comparisons.

Note also that these stats may also miss another thing. It's sometimes suggested countries like NZ and perhaps Australia and others accept a player in to their top level squad for a small number of matches when they are young, then never use them again. This effectively bars them from competing for any other country such as their country of birth (or that of their parents). (As with a number of sports, since I think the 90s players can compete at age level competitions and stuff for one country, and then another at the top level, but only one country at the top level [38]. And also see Grannygate.)

Some people go as far as to imply it's intentional. A more likely possibility is the player was given a chance or used temporarily as cover for an injured player, but didn't perform well enough nor in their later career to earn a more permanently place. And there was no particular desire to stop them competing for anyone else, although probably also no concern that this would do so. (Also, looking at it from the player's POV, for some players, even this brief time may be one of their career highlights. Although I suspect many would be happy if they had that, and also had other options. Albeit that is up to the IRB, and the NZRU at least has generally been supportive AFAIK of at a minimum, allowing Pacific Island players to play for their country of birth or probably parents, after playing for sides like NZ or Australia.)

Nil Einne (talk) 15:34, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Actually, seems I was quite wrong about Japan. Per [39], in fact 5 of the 10 are naturalised (the other 5 were still foreign citizens as of very recently). Note also that some of the players in Japan went to either secondary school, or university in Japan. But we still don't know how Australia compares, if it's true the 4 I mentioned are citizens, then they would be equal or fewer. Nil Einne (talk) 15:23, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

one way flight from Connecticut to Germany[edit]

Hello, I am wondering what is an average plane ticket price for a one-way trip from Connecticut to Germany. I have checked websites such as and of the flights are around 2,000 to 2,500$. I believe an average price for a one-way flight to Germany would be about 2,000$. Does anyone know an exact figure for the average cost of a one way flight to Germany? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:252:D65:D2F0:7835:BA74:1F32:2F6E (talk) 21:40, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Is it difficult to get a flight for 1,000$? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:252:D65:D2F0:7835:BA74:1F32:2F6E (talk) 21:42, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Without knowing whereabouts in Germany you want to go, this question can't really be answered accurately. However, I've had a quick look myself, and it seems that typical prices from JFK to Frankfurt are around the $600 mark. Tevildo (talk) 22:37, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
As for your first question, it isn't possible to come up with an "average" price for this trip. The price will vary dramatically depending on fare class (first, business, coach), the date of travel, how far in advance the ticket is purchased, on which day of the week the ticket is purchased, and so on. For example, fares tend to be higher for summer travel than for travel during other seasons, and the further in advance the ticket is purchased, the less expensive it tends to be. Another odd phenomenon is that round-trip (return) tickets are often less expensive than one way, so you can often save by buying a round trip ticket and then canceling your return flight. Finally, there is only one major commercial airport in Connecticut, Bradley International Airport, and you will pay a large premium (typically hundreds of dollars more) flying out of that airport on an international itinerary over the fare you would pay departing from a New York airport such as John F. Kennedy International Airport. Likewise flights to Germany's major intercontinental airports, such as Frankfurt and Munich tend to be cheaper than flights to German regional airports requiring a connection. So it will probably be worth your while to take a bus or Connecticut limo to JFK and fly from there to Frankfurt, Munich, or possibly Düsseldorf, and then continue to your destination by Deutsche Bahn. I recommend checking fares on for routes connecting New York (or Hartford) and those three German airports. For dates in January, I am seeing round trip fares below $900. Marco polo (talk) 22:54, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I was wrong to to say that round-trip tickets are cheaper. I am seeing one-way tickets (JFK to Frankfurt) in January for under $400. Marco polo (talk) 22:58, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Well, they're not always cheaper, but they're often cheaper. Round-trip tickets, that is. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 19:49, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
WARNING: WP:OR, anecdata coming: This, in my personal experience, is very true. On more than one occasion, I have bought a round-trip direct flight ticket, and just threw away the return ticket because I didn't need it; for the simple reason that the round-trip ticket back-and-forth from where I was going was cheaper than the one-way ticket. One time, I needed to fly from Philadelphia to Boston; the round trip ticket from Philadephia to Boston and back again to Philly was cheaper than buying a one-way ticket from Philadelphia to Boston on the exact same airplane. This was back in the 1990s when travel agents were necessary to book plane tickets. Nowadays, with the proliferation of travel aggregation websites, the whole system puts a downward pressure on airplane tickets, and I haven't found such "quirks" to occur much anymore. But certainly, it used to be that round-trip tickets were much cheaper than one-way tickets, even for the same flight. In other words, in many cases, it was cheaper to buy the round trip ticket, and throw away the return flight, than it was to intentionally book the one way ticket. It used to be even more perverse than that as well. I distinctly remember a travel agent booking me a multi-leg flight with a layover, where I simply didn't use the second leg (that is, the layover site was actually my destination) because it was cheaper to book the trip that way than to book a direct flight on the same exact plane. So, for example, lets say I wanted to fly from Philadelphia to Cincinnati. The direct flight between the two cities was more expensive than the flight from Philadelphia to Chicago with a layover in Cincinnati, even though the first leg of that trip (the Philly--> Cinci leg) was on the exact same plane. It was cheaper to book the trip to Chicago, and burn the second ticket, than it was to book the direct trip to Cincinnati. That specific example was not the one I flew on, (I forget the specifics of my early-to-mid 1990s flight that took advantage of such weirdness) but I did used to have to do such things to save money, and the money saved by such tricks was not trivial, especially for a broke college student. Travel economics used to be so weird. It's gotten much simpler. --Jayron32 06:20, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Yep, airline ticket pricing is notoriously quirky. I remember a couple of months ago I was booking a flight from North America (can't remember which airport; let's call it FOO) to Germany on a certain carrier who shall remain nameless (let's call them Fluthansa.) Tickets from FOO to FRA were $X on the direct flight, or $X-100 for a one-connection flight via Munich (MUC). That is, FOO-FRA was $X, FOO-MUC-FRA was $X-100. For various reasons, I actually didn't care if I ended up at FRA or MUC, so I said Okay, let's just go to Munich. That should be even cheaper. So I keyed that request into the booking engine. Up comes the FOO-MUC direct flight (which was the first leg of the $X-100 FOO-MUC-FRA itinerary, remember) and it costs...$X. But wait, now there's a one-connection option to MUC for $X-100. Sure enough, it's via Frankfurt (FOO-FRA-MUC), which includes the same FOO-FRA direct flight I priced originally.
Doing the math, one can readily determine that the value of a commuter flight from Munich to Frankfurt (or the other way) is...negative one hundred dollars. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:01, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Assuming that you are a US citizen, and don't hold dual nationality, then you will need proof of onward travel to enter the Schengen area visa-free. See Visa_policy_of_the_Schengen_Area#Visa_exemptions and expand the Rules for the Annex II nationals box for a summary of the Visa rules. LongHairedFop (talk) 11:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Are you referring to: have sufficient funds for their stay and onward/return journey? -- ToE 12:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
It's also worth trying the trip either to or from a smaller regional airport. I consistently find that it's considerably cheaper to fly from Austin, Texas to London Heathrow via Dallas than it is to fly directly from Dallas to Heathrow on the exact same transatlantic flight! This makes zero logical sense - but evidently the extra premium rates for a direct flight isn't always logical. So instead of flying from (say JFK) find a regional airport that's a hundred miles from there and see if you can do better! The difference isn't small - so it's worth a try. SteveBaker (talk) 20:27, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

September 28[edit]

Has anyone ever successfully appealed a dishonorable discharge?[edit]

In any branch of the American armed services, has any person, who is notable and an enwiki bio exists mentioning the incident, ever successfully appealed a dishonorable discharge and got it changed to honorable or at least overturned/removed from their record? I see that Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2014 August 3#Honorable vs. dishonorable discharge from the U. S. military partially answers my question. -- œ 03:10, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

This article, which is a good overview of the difficulty behind the practice of upgrading a discharge (as it is known) notes the case of one Vincent Plummer, who does not yet have a Wikipedia article, but is noted at Columbian Harmony Cemetery as the first African-American Chaplain in the U.S. Army, and may have enough information out there to pass minimum standards for a Wikipedia article, both for his singular status as first African American Chaplain, and for the unusualness of his discharge upgrade, which took something around a century to effect. --Jayron32 04:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

September 29[edit]

service dog for autism[edit]

Recently I saw a dog wearing a jacket marked Autism Assistance Animal or similar language. What is that dog's job?? —Tamfang (talk) 06:45, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

See Autism service dog. Nanonic (talk) 06:51, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Website/listserv etc for home appliances?[edit]

I'm replacing a gas range, and want to do some research that goes a little deeper than the ordinary information from Consumer Reports, Amazon reviews, etc.

Is there a website where they really geek out about this stuff? Herbivore (talk) 19:41, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Finding a location based on a screenshot from google maps[edit]


I'm doing some research on aviation crash sites. At the moment, I have a screenshot from google maps. I have, stupidly completely forgotten to record one of the locations. Is there any software or anything to match up the screenshots with the actual map/location on google maps? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:59, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

It seems unlikely. Have you tried looking in your browser history? SteveBaker (talk) 22:46, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
You could always try posting the image somewhere and see if people can recognize it. Crash sites tend to be near airports, airports tend to be near cities, and cities are relatively easy to recognize for people who know them. -- (talk) 22:51, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

September 30[edit]

Why did African-Amerian "Jive" talk die out during the 1980's?[edit]

Jive just wasn't done for the movies of the 70's -- lots of people actually spoke like that.

Then came the rap and breakdancing era of the early to middle 80's and it seemed like Jive died overnight. By the late 80's nobody was speaking Jive anymore, not even the older Black folks.

This may make a good subject for a serious book of some kind. Does anyone know more about this topic? Zombiesturm (talk) 17:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

I suspect that when any "secret language" like that becomes widely understood and the subject of parody, it's no longer seen as exclusive or "cool", so loses it's appeal. Then it's on to the next version, with words like "bidniz" and "skrilla", until they fall out of favor, in turn, for the same reason. There's nothing unique about African-American slang in this respect. See 23 skidoo, for example. StuRat (talk) 17:54, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Jive talk is a redirect to African_American_Vernacular_English. Of course it has changed over time, but it's still alive and well. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:14, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes, having lived in areas including the Bronx, Harlem, and Inwood since that time I can assure you that the cant has simply evolved. It's actually quite hilarious to see suburban white youth culture adopting what was current in black youth culture 5-10 years after the fact. μηδείς (talk) 20:43, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Blame Airplane!. shoy (reactions) 12:59, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

How to act or behave like a Prince[edit]

So, I was at home alone, not studying, watching television, I started watching 'Barbie' in 'Cartoon Network' because there was nothing else to watch; nothing good at all showing. It was AWESOME! They were teaching how to eat, drink, walk like a Princess. I also wanted to learn but the awesome moves will make me look like, the 'gay lord'. Basically I want to learn 'how to act or behave like a Prince', what do I do/where shall I go/what shall I watch/what shall I read with pictures in it... -- Space Ghost (talk) 18:52, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

A prince of what era and place? Surely Nayan_(Mongol_Prince) acted a bit different from Charles, Prince of Wales. Guessing that you might be interested in Victorian ethos and style of the rich and powerful, I'd suggest the plays of Oscar Wilde. You can get free versions of most of his stuff at Project Gutenberg, here's Lady Windermere's Fan [40] and Picture of Dorian Gray [41]. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:10, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
See mirrors for princes. (If you want to be an evil prince, try reading The Prince.)
If you're more interested in playing the role of a prince, say at Halloween, you might try watching some movies with princes in them, and see how they act. StuRat (talk) 19:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Smiley123.png Money/riches, power and evilness don't apply to me. I was actually thinking of it for real life. I want girls/women to rest their jaws back including their cognitive process when they think about other boys/men except me...

My 'user page' defines myself. I'm looking for a 'step by step guide', as easy as what I saw in the 'Barbie' programme, e.g., how to put a book in your head and walk/balance with it, how to pour tea and how to drink from a tea cup, how to dance... Using the words 'thee' and or 'thy' and or '(eth)' when I speak/write would be advantageous...

Special powers such as resurrecting people from the dead like Jesus, halfing the Moon like Muhammad or enormous strength like Hercules is not a requisite/mandatory. SMocking.gif

Can you guys help me, please! It has become a part of my development process now.

Space Ghost (talk) 19:11, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like you're after deportment and etiquette lessons. Here is somewhere that teaches that, but I don't know if they do specific "act like a prince" lessons. Iapetus (talk) 12:10, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I've saved the link. I'll look at it when I go back, if I have money in the near future. -- Space Ghost (talk) 18:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Iapetus, I don't think wants to be deported. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 17:45, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Leptus, meant this Tora Face-smile.svg, not in the sense transportation I believe. -- Space Ghost (talk) 18:24, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Goods transport vehicles[edit]

Why do large goods vehicles (trucks/lorries) in the USA generally have their driving cabs up and behind the engine compartment. Whereas, in europe the vehicles are flat fronted and the cab is 'above' the engine.

It's like the flat vs long front thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:12, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

This is hearsay, and I can't be bothered to look for references, but: In Europe there tend to be restrictions on the maximum length a truck is allowed to have on a public road. Hence in order to maximize space available for goods they put the cab over the engine. In the US no such restrictions exist and then it is better (easier construction, easier maintenance, maybe others) to put the engine in front of the cab. (talk) 23:20, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Tractor unit and cab over appear to back this up. Here in Southern California, it's not that uncommon to see "flat front" trucks, but from memory they're almost all from European or Japanese manufacturers. Those articles appear to confirm that those manufacturers mostly make "flat front" units while U.S. manufacturers mostly go with the engine in front. -- (talk) 00:00, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
See our Longer Heavier Vehicle article: "As of 2009, [in the UK] vehicles are limited to a maximum of 6 axles, and limited to an overall maximum weight of 44 tonnes (43.3 long tons; 48.5 short tons) and 16.5 m (54 ft 2 in) in length for articulated lorries, and 44 tonnes (43.3 long tons; 48.5 short tons) and 18.75 m (61 ft 6 in) for drawbar lorries. The restriction on overall length is why the majority of UK lorries are hauled by 'cab over' tractor units, although for the minority of UK uses where the weight limit is reached before the length limit, conventional trucks are legal." I expect that the length restriction is due to our narrow roads and is intended to help prevent this, this or even this. Alansplodge (talk) 12:43, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
These limitations are the same all over Europe (and Russia etc). Only in Sweden and in Finland are LHVs allowed up to 25.25 metres for 62 tonnes. Akseli9 (talk) 19:06, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Aside from legal restrictions (or not), wouldn't an engine in front of the cab be easier to service? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:50, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
That was mentioned above. It's in the first response to the original question. Dismas|(talk) 18:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
See also Conventional truck for other advantages. Alansplodge (talk) 20:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

October 1[edit]

historic fingerprints[edit]

I imagine that every major spy shop has made a habit, since before I was born, of trying to obtain the fingerprints of pretty much every public figure (over some threshold of significance). How far back does this go? If I somehow found some prints allegedly belonging to Abraham Lincoln, say, would there be any way to check it? This question was prompted by an episode of The Sandbaggers, involving a fingerprint of the Permanent Undersecretary of the Foreign Office.Tamfang (talk) 23:15, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Fingerprint and forensic science give some details. The use of fingerprints as a method of identification doesn't appear to have been widespread before the 20th century, so I doubt Lincoln's fingerprints are reliably recorded anywhere. -- (talk) 23:24, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
*if* you were able to obtain copies of such fingerprints, you'd need to obtain them from multiple independent sources and compare them. Not just different sellers of copies made from the same original source - but from different sellers of copies made from DIFFERENT original sources. So if Vendor A has prints from (let's say) a book known to have been owned by Lincoln then that could easily be the prints of his wife - so you'd also need prints from Vendor A from something else - maybe something that resided in his office where his wife rarely visited. However, since the likelyhood that Vendor A is a disreputable fraud are pretty high - even if those two sets of prints match, they could both be faked. So you'd also want to get a set from Vendor B to compare against. But it would be no use to get copies of the same print taken from that same book because both Vendors might have been cheated by the same original source. So ideally, you'd want prints taken from different objects that would have been located in different places (in order to increase the chance that these are both objects that Lincoln would have held - but lower the chances that some other person might also have held them both) and supplied by different Vendors who could independently provide a trail of ownership back to Lincoln himself that include no overlapping sources.
If you get a match under those stringent circumstances - then I think the odds are good that it's genuine.
Of course if you have the *original* print on an actual physical object, then perhaps it's possible to get DNA from fingerprints - and that might be another possible route. Lincoln is suspected of suffering either from MEN2b or Marfan's syndrome - both relatively rare genetic disorders - if you could extract DNA from the print and demonstrate the existence of one or other of those conditions, I think you could be fairly confident that they're real...assuming there are no other 'red flags'.
SteveBaker (talk) 14:17, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2[edit]

Training a cat to open a can[edit]

Easy open

Has anyone ever trained a cat to open a can of cat food? Viriditas (talk) 21:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Most manual tin openers require opposable thumbs. Alansplodge (talk) 22:28, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Yo, it's 2015. Most cat food in the USA, at least the high end variety, have easy open lids. My cat uses its toes like thumbs for many things (but probably not as much as polydactyl cats). The point is, he could be trained to pull the tab on the can back with his teeth while holding the can steady with his paws, much as they do when they are play fighting with another cat or holding down a mouse or a bird. It's pretty much the same action, however, one would have to determine how heavy the cat would have to be to hold the can down and pull back the tab. A small cat wouldn't be able to do it. Can you calculate how much the cat would have to weigh and how much force it would have to exert to pull back the lid with its mouth? Of course, it would have to be trained how to flip the easy open tab forward first, and then how to pull it back, which would be hard. Viriditas (talk) 23:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
It might be harmful to the cat's teeth to use them reguarly on a metal tab, though. -- (talk) 23:08, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I agree, and I wouldn't do it, but this is more of a thought experiment. Could it be done? Viriditas (talk) 23:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
If it could be done, the way to do it would be to give the cat a slightly opened can lid with the ring tab pulled up. The cat would quickly figure out how to pull the lid open enough to eat. Then present the cat with cans whose lids are more and more closed, but with the ring tab pulled up. Once it figures out how to pull the lid open starting with a lifted ring tab, begin the same process with the tab, presenting the can to the cat with the ring tab flatter and flatter until it gets to the position in which it is sold.
There must be a name for this backward sort for training. I was taught it in high-school French, and have used it in language tutoring. For example, my mother has an heirloom collection of matryoshka dolls. The grandkids were told they had to say the word before they could play with the items. So I asked them to say -ka, then -shka, then -yoshka, then -tryoshka, then matryoshka, which seemed simple once they had learnt it backwards. μηδείς (talk) 00:57, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
The "name for this backward sort for training" is "backward chaining"; see Backward Chaining (Applied Behavior Analysis). -- Deborahjay (talk) 08:27, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

October 3[edit]

What happened to the annual September monument photo contest this year?[edit]

I realize this may not be the best place to ask this question, but I couldn't find a better one.

I have participated in this contest since 2012, when I believe it was called Wikipedia Loves Monuments. I have contributed photos to the NRHP list for several central Iowa counties. I was only able to view Wikipedia on my smart phone during most of September and could not see the full main page.

I know I can add photos to this list anytime, but I looked forward to the contest. Was it cancelled this year? Cancelled for good?CelticClicker (talk) 04:03, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

@CelticClicer: It's here. Dismas|(talk) 04:13, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Could placing enough climbable things amongst big crowds prevent disasters?[edit]

Maybe ladders securely rooted in the ground and oriented to not block traffic? How does processionary asphyxiation still happen even in industrialized nations (Love Parade). It's just simple geometry, it seems like there's got to be simple way(s) to stop these tragedies. Are there any problems with this idea? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:02, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Of course I understand that fully understanding the physics of crowd disasters is not as easy as ameliorating them but stopping people from dying is more important. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:08, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

One type of crush injury is when a crowd moves up against a solid object, and those in front are crushed to death. That risk can be reduced by using fences designed to fall over if enough force is applied. Of course, this provides some extra area, but eventually the crowd will push into the next barrier. And the fallen fences must not present a trip hazard.
When people are rushing the stage of a concert, you can pull those in front up onto stage, but that might motivate those in back to push even harder.
Another type of crush injury is when panic causes everyone to try to run, and they trample those who fall.
Ultimately, you just need to limit the quantity and density of people to prevent such injuries. Having small groups separated into "pens" would be one way to keep the total crush pressure low. Onother simple solution is to have seats and no standing room area. With seats you can only pack in so many people. If anyone attempts to remain standing, they will be yelled at by everyone who's view is being blocked.
For something like the Hajj, they could have a continuous train with seats and no standing room, that circles the Kaaba the required number of times and then departs. If one isn't enough, they could have several at different elevations. They might also want to extend the Hajj to 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Of course, much of this might run into religious objections. StuRat (talk) 19:17, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
  • It's worth pointing out that at the Love Parade disaster, the steps and ladders played a major part in the catastrophe - they caused bottlenecks and were easy to fall from, especially when things were chaotic and quite a few people were drunk. Simiarly, the awful Victoria Hall and Bethnal Green disasters were both caused by people hurrying on stairs, tripping, and causing a chain reaction. The only disaster I can think of where people did manage to successfully escape by climbing was the Hillsborough disaster, where fans inside the fenced-in terrace were able to climb the fence to safety. Ultimately, the answer to these disasters is to design areas where the exits are larger and easier to use than the entrances, but that's often easier said than done, since a perfectly engineered building may still be poorly organised (if you believe Saudi Arabia's side of the story, the disaster at the Hajj was caused by one of the exits becoming unexpectedly blocked by a group of pilgrims leaving without permission). Smurrayinchester 21:33, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

October 4[edit]

Hurtgen Forest[edit]

From a tactical POV, would the Battle of the Hurtgen Forest be considered an example of jungle warfare? 2601:646:8E01:9089:F88D:DE34:7772:8E5B (talk) 00:14, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Looking for a specific Iron Man scene on Youtube[edit]

I think this scene is from Iron Man 3 but my roommate says it's from Iron Man 1. Tony Stark has lost his suit, and so he has to build a bunch of homemade contraptions and infiltrate somewhere. The scene I'm specifically looking for is when he uses a Christmas Ornament that explodes and fills the guard's face with shards of glass. Can anyone find that scene? If I have to use Youtube's "link to a specific time in the middle of a video" that's okay. --Aabicus (talk) 01:02, 4 October 2015 (UTC)