Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

October 27

Presdential interviews for sale

I want to buy interviews of Presidents and celebrities Miamibil at the aol place

What's so special about the 787?

Why is the Boeing 787 Dreamliner making news everywhere? It's not the largest or fastest airplane or something. Are all new models of commercial jetliners met with such fanfare? Acceptable (talk) 02:16, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

There are several superlatives listed in the article Boeing 787 Dreamliner, which you can read at your own leisure. Many people find these superlatives significant, which is why they care. If you don't care, that's cool too. --Jayron32 02:25, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

It's very fuel efficient, plus it's a big part of Boeing's business future. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:26, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

(ec):It uses a much larger proportion of composite materials in its structure than any other large airliner, thus it represents a major shift away from riveted Duralumin construction that has been the norm for large aircraft for over 70 years. Roger (talk) 08:28, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

It has also been a significant amount of time since Boeing rolled a new design off the assembly line. the 777 came out in the mid-90s ('94 I think) and they haven't since then. If a major market player in any industry released their first new product in almost two decades, it would be majorly newsworthy. HominidMachinae (talk) 05:35, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

It's not the largest or fastest, but it is the first of its kind - it primarily uses composite materials; the metal jetliners have been in use since the first completely jet-powered Vickers_VC.1_Viking in the 1940's. The use of composite materials opens up many new construction opportunities and challenges (you can do things with composites that you can't do with metal), and is far lighter, giving the aircraft significantly greater efficiency. For most people, the 787 may just be another airplane, but for people interested in aviation, it is truly a huge advance in technology, environmental stewardship, and even passenger comfort. This isn't just an aircraft that has different and interesting features, it may well be the very first of a very long list of this new type of aircraft (already, Airbus is working on their first composite-based aircraft, the A350 to stay competitive). The 787 is also the best-selling new airliner to enter into production, with, I believe, over 800 orders before it even flew, which is quite remarkable. Falconus^{p t c} 08:25, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

its made of plastic, has bigger windows, and 'seems' more roomy (though without actually being more roomy --just a trick of good design). also: the potty has a window. Cramyourspam (talk) 17:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I seem to remember the Airbus A380 getting a lot of coverage, at least in Europe, when it was launched. But the A380 was the world's biggest airliner, so that was part of the reason. New airliners always seem to get a lot of publicity - the Boeing 777 inspired several TV programs I saw when it came out in the mid 1990s. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:00, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Would you believe that the last few cups' worth of fuel is worth bickering over?

At a McPherson, KS Kwik Shop, a 40s man in his late-model sky blue Dodge Charger (who, in sunglasses, looked like an upstanding office supervisor, not an ex-con) asked me if I lifted the hose to get the "last cup" of gas in, and I said, yeah, because it's wasteful otherwise, so everyone ought to do it.

He then said, "you just stole from me, asshole." I figured that if he was the owner of this Kwik Shop, I should call the Kroger corporate offices to get him fired (and possibly get me some kind of compensation for the trouble.)

I clarified that I learned that the fuel at the bottom of the hose was the fuel I already paid for; any drop of fuel that left the pump and went into the hose is already purchased. He wouldn't listen for some reason, and somewhat repeated it.

Then I asked if he was the owner of this Kwik Shop, so he said, "No, but if you don't move your car I'm going to kick your ass." Just before I left the area, I got his license plate number, reported it to Kroger's corporate headquarters (in case he DID work for them in some capacity, and to report to Law Enforcement if it was indeed reportable), and posted it someplace online.

First off, exactly how much gasoline would typically sit at the bottom of the hose? At $3.40/gallon as it was sometime that summer (at least after a Dillons card discount), how much therefore, would the gasoline at the bottom of the hose have been worth?

(I have a feeling that if I let him beat me up, the lawsuit payouts could have paid off my student loans.)

Moreover, I may get a Taser in the future for self-defense. If anyone else repeats his actions, how does it sound for me to point it at them to get them to back off from that attitude and go away? Thank you, --70.179.174.63 (talk) 06:37, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

No idea about the quantity of fuel, but it can't be much. As for what do I think about the taser, from a legal standpoint, we cannot advise you (it's against our policy), but from a practical standpoint, carrying any weapon, legality aside, is a huge responsibility, and I caution you not to take it lightly. Falconus^{p t c} 08:11, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm trying hard not to go into legal advice territory, but the OP might want to read our article on assault.Sjö (talk) 05:11, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Letting off a taser in a gas station does not sound like a good idea to me. Both of you may end up in a fireball. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:15, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Tasering someone for either a drop of gas or calling you an asshole will get you into jail. That's just common sense. How about you just carry a gold-framed dime with an idiot certificate and proudly present it to them if they insist? Man... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 08:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I was only referring to pointing a taser at him in order to get him to rethink what he should really bicker about. I'd only discharge said taser if harm was certain to come from him. --70.179.174.63 (talk) 09:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Unnecessarily escalating a situation by bringing in any kind of weapon is usually a bad idea, both legally and practically. Just imagine the goon mistakes it for a real gun and uses his Special Forces training to counter the threat. Or, more realistically, just imagine he neither backs down nor makes additional aggressive moves. Do you stand there with you taser forever? Do you use it anyways? Do you put it away, disarming yourself? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 09:09, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Part of using a weapon responsibly is not pointing it at someone whom you are not prepared to use it on. If someone talks trash at you, and you pull a weapon, you have just escalated the conflict ten-fold, and frankly, are almost begging to be shot. It's not like you've described this man as being particularly reasonable to begin with. It is obviously your decision, but my advice is to not carry a weapon unless you have had extensive training in its use. A taser is not a conflict-mediation tool, it is a dangerous weapon that is not to be misused. Falconus^{p t c} 09:17, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I sounds like the person involved was waiting to use the pump you had just used and got annoyed because you lifted the hose to get the last bit which may be a bit dumb in any case (I guess they considered it rude to lift the hose so were not going to do it themselves which means if this actually does anything they would lose out), and then got more annoyed because you hung around rather then just leave while they were still waiting to use the pump. I'm not sure why you believe he owned the petrol station. As with others, the suggestion to get or use a taser seems an extreme overeaction to a minor dispute with someone who was a bit of an idiot and isn't likely to go down well for you even if we ignore the legal issues (and to be honest as dumb as the guy sounds from your description, your suggestion makes you sound worse). Nil Einne (talk) 10:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you believe he owned the petrol station.

Because the term "you stole from me" immediately made me think of how a shopkeeper/shop owner would tell off a shoplifter. --70.179.174.63 (talk) 10:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes I realise that but considering the details presented that seems the far less likely intepretation. I admit I don't live in the US but is it normal for petrol stations owners to hang around in their cars there? Did you see whether he drove up to the pump you were using after you left? If he did, this makes your intepretation even less likely. Edit: Forgot to clarify when I said use a taser I'm including using it to threaten someone Nil Einne (talk) 10:24, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Let's back up a bit. Does that trick even work on modern gas pumps? After the computer decides your $20 is spent, can you get more fuel out of the hose? I thought the shut-off valve was now in the handle for exactly this reason? I can't find a source either way. Have I been misinformed? APL (talk) 08:51, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Like it matters — we're talking about one dude who gets pissed off over what might be $0.10 worth of gas, and the other dude who seriously considers tasering him for that. And of course the IP geolocates to the Midwes' of the Yóónidid States Ovamewica. Home sweet home... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 10:10, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

In my experience, there are irrational people everywhere. --Mr.98 (talk) 11:45, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

There's something the OP has overlooked, namely that if there is normally any "paid for" gas left in the hose, he's obtaining the "paid for" gas from the previous user of the hose, for free. So it balances out. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:53, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Which of course is why the other person in the scenario felt that he had been stolen from. He was the customer after the OP, so rather than getting the fuel remaining in the hose, he'd get air. It's quite doubtful that there'd be a cup of fuel or air, anyway, assuming the dispensing system works that way. --LarryMac | Talk 12:41, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The OP needs to learn the wisdom of blowing it off and just walking away - there's no shame in that. Life is full of assholes who shoot off their mouths . . . move on and forget about it. If you're still mad, don't shop there anymore. And realize that merely pointing a weapon, any weapon, loaded/activated or not, at anybody for any reason will get your ass in big-time trouble with the law that will ruin your day much worse than any rude remarks from the shopowner ever could. You don't need the hassle. Textorus (talk) 13:23, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

An aphorism I heard a long time ago was more on the lines of "never brandish a weapon unless you intend to use it. If you don't, be prepared to have the weapon taken away and used against you". Franamax (talk) 05:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Parents should follow that advice, particularly those who are prone to making "If you don't ... by this evening, I swear I'm going to kill you" statements. A parent with any sense of integrity should promptly smite their child if they fail to comply. Children should be taught by example that promises must be kept.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:49, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

We're fucked.

Please can someone point me at a transcript of the speech (I think made by a banker) which basically consisted of the words "We're fucked. I'm fucked, you're fucked. Germany's fucked." - it continues in a similar vein for some time? Many thanks. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:27, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The one I'm familiar with is not about Germany but about the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions in the British government. It was said by Richard Mottram, the Permanent Secretary. Our article says he said "We're all fucked. I'm fucked. You're fucked. The whole department is fucked. It's the biggest cock-up ever. We're all completely fucked." DuncanHill (talk) 11:15, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes I think that's the one, but he went on at some length to include other countries as well, which is why I'm after a transcript of what he said. --TammyMoet (talk) 12:25, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

As it was about an attempt to use the events of 9/11 to bury bad news from the department it didn't go on to refer to other countries. I suspect it may have been adapted by either Rory Bremner or in The Thick of It. DuncanHill (talk) 12:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah. You could be right there, it's the sort of language "The Thick of It" used. Thanks. --TammyMoet (talk) 14:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Crisis? What Crisis?

The current European debt situation is described by the BBC and other media as a 'crisis'. There usually follows dire predictions of disaster if something isn't done, and done sooner rather than later. However, many third-world countries have been in debt to the IMF and many donor countries for years on end. Those countries seem to keep going while corrupt officials cream off billions. Why is the debt situation in the Eurozone considered such a huge crisis when it doesn't seem to be considered a crisis for the third world? Astronaut (talk) 11:41, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Maybe because the third-world debt doesn't affect the BBC, but the Eurozone debt might? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Massive debt is "business as usual" in parts of the third world, thus nobody gets too excited about it. In the Eurozone it is a major disruption to "business as usual". See PIGS (economics), it may offer some insight into the issue. Roger (talk) 12:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I think it is a matter of scale. See List of countries by external debt, for instance. Euro countries seem to have 1 or 2 orders of magnitude more debt than African countries. Zambia being unable to relay its debts does not threaten the global banking system. Italy or Spain not being able to repay their debts does. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:22, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Note if you combine the two answers you get something obvious. Anyone who is a debtor to Zambia [sorry Zambia I didn't chose you as an example ;-)] must have known they were doing something risky, otherwise they were idiots. However it was widely believe loaning to Italy or Greece was very safe until recently. And if you combine this with your original question you arrive at another conclusion, there's a reason why a significant part of the Greece or Italian debt is owed to commercial banks but in many of the countries you mention it's to the IMF, the World Bank and 'donor' countries. Nil Einne (talk) 15:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit conflict] Yes, it is the size of the European economies, their importance to the global economy, and the extent to which the European economies are interlinked, particularly to one another, but also to outside economies. If Zambia declares bankruptcy, no one outside of Zambia is likely to suffer much. If, for example, Italy declares bankruptcy (a very real prospect if a solution is not found to this crisis), then it is not only Italy that would suffer. Bankruptcy in Italy would be likely to push other vulnerable European nations, such as Spain, Portugal, and Ireland, over the edge to fail as well, because lenders facing default in Italy will fear the same in those countries, since Italy's failure would demonstrate the inability of the EU to rescue its members. Banks all over Europe (including the UK because of its banks' exposure to Italian debt) are likely to fail, and banks in the United States and other countries could fail or be forced to sharply reduce lending as a result. Meanwhile, governments, facing the wholesale failure of their banking sectors, would be in difficult positions. The size of a bailout might drag a country such as France into bankruptcy as well; the more likely alternative would be for a nation such as France to nationalize failing banks and default on the banks' creditors, leading to a destruction of capital and a loss of confidence in Europe's financial institutions. A failure in Europe would be likely to bring down the entire global financial system, as international lending would dry up in the face of the threat of nationalization and expropriation and a loss of confidence by lenders and investors in the integrity of the system. All of these things together could cause a global depression. Marco polo (talk) 15:35, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Third World economies clearly can have crises; however, because they are a smaller part of the world economy, the crisis is localized. One exception may be the 1997 Asian financial crisis, which started in developing countries and wound up affecting the whole world to some extent. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

It's above all the fact that they have a common currency, the Euro. If not for that, this would be similar to other debt crises. It would still be serious because of the exposure of large banks, but the common currency is what makes it beyond serious. Looie496 (talk) 23:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Relating to TV programs (in England)

I see noone has yet answered my earlier questions on this subject, but now I have another.

Let's suppose there is some new program starting on some TV channel, any of them, next week, and I don't know about it yet but I would really enjoy watching it. When eventually I do hear about it, it is already half way through and I have to try to catch up on the internet. Then I realise, this is actually the sort of program I would have liked to record and watch back later as well, but now I can't, because I have already missed half of it.

So, rather than looking through the TV guides for every channel every day, is there any way I can get a list of all the new programs due start soon, so I can look through and see if any of them interest me?

148.197.80.214 (talk) 14:15, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Buy a tv guide? Most tabloid papers include one with their saturday edition, with details about new shows that week as well as program listings--Jac16888 ^Talk 14:20, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

This site has a "New series this week" menu. I'm sure other sites provide similar information. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:52, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Happens to me all the time. Several series are now available on iPlayer in their entirety (I'm currently catching up with Fry's Planet Word). The only guaranteed solution is to buy a TV guide every week, trawl through it and set up your HDD recorder before you forget. However, if you stumble upon something half way through, check to see whether it's available on a timeshift channel and set your HDD to pick that up. Finally, bear in mind that most stuff gets repeated eventually, sometimes within only a few hours.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Watch the adverts. Every channel advertises virtually all of its new show between existing shows - that way you get a trailer of what to expect from the show and a reminder of when it starts/when it's on. People might hate adverts but they do serve a useful purpose. The tvguide link is good - I have that on my favourites list generally, beyond this you could check out Category:Upcoming television series (sorry no idea how to link to it but basically category; upcoming television shows) just because Wikipedia does have an article on everything! ny156uk (talk) 17:36, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

If you have Sky, many channels have a catch-up session for new shows. So, for example, they show the first 5 then the following Sunday they'll have a catch-up session of those 5 shows back-to-back. You can easily find these by looking choosing 'search' from the programme guide. Astronaut (talk) 11:22, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

You could get yourself a Virgin Media TiVo. I understand that the TiVo will actively seek out shows, old or new, based on you setting a "series recording". So, in the OP's scenario, imagine that the first few episodes are repeated either on the same channel (mid-week, after midnight, as is fairly common) or perhaps a year later on another channel; the TiVo will record them. I really want one! --Rixxin (talk) 11:50, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

UK: NHS certificate to proof that I am insured in the UK (needed for my German health insurance company)

Dear all,

I am currently doing a 1-year Master's programme in the UK and am entitled to be insured via the NHS. As I have previously lived in Germany, I am still insured there, which costs me about €80 (i.e. approx. £70) a month. For obvious reasons, I want to quit my German insurance. To do so, I need to proof that I am legally insured elsewhere. As I still find it quite difficult to understand the UK healthcare system, could you please tell me who I need to turn to in order to request/receive a certificate indicating the date from which on I am covered by the NHS? Thank you very much for your support!

Kind regards --80.194.187.112 (talk) 19:08, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

You probably want a European Health Insurance Card --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:35, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit conflict] As this UK government site explains, you first need to register with the NHS through a local practitioner in your area. You will need to fill out an application at the practitioner's office. You should probably call ahead to find out what documentation they will need for your application. When you register, you should probably request an NHS medical card, as described under the ninth question on this page. Alternatively, once you are registered, you might apply for an EHIC card, which can also serve as proof of insurance with the NHS. Probably the best thing would be to contact your German insurer and ask them which of these documents they prefer so that you can obtain the correct one when you register with the NHS. Marco polo (talk) 19:42, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

(ec2) You should be registered with a GP (a general practitioner). Even if there's nothing at all wrong with you now, and you don't intent to make any routine uses of a doctor during your stay, a GP is the gateway to the entire NHS for anything except emergency services and dentistry (and even a minor injury requiring say a few stitches will require your GP practice to be involved, such as removing stitches or wound care). Your educational institution will be able to refer you to a local practice (or may, in a few cases, run a student health service that is essentially a GP practice on campus). Registering with a GP takes about 10 minutes of form filling. A GP practice in an area that includes a college or university will be well used to dealing with people in your position, and will be able to help you with your German insurance issue (and with transferring your records from Germany). -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 19:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for all your detailed answers! I forgot to mention that I have already registered with a GP via my university. If I understand you right, I need to contact my GP in order to get/request such a certificate. Please correct me if I have misinterpreted your reply! However, as my German health insurer requires a certification indicating the date from which on I am insured in the UK, an EHIC is unfortunately not sufficient as a proof... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.194.187.112 (talk) 21:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand, probably because I don't understand the German system, but I'm intrigued... If you stop paying the German insurance company but provide them with no proof of ongoing cover, what could they possibly do to you? What gives them the right to demand to see proof that you're covered elsewhere? Why would you care whether they're making such demands? Why couldn't you opt not to have any cover at all? --Dweller (talk) 12:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

This is an 'Everyone needs a health insurance' law. They are obliged to insure you until you are insured by someone else. It doesn't matter if you pay the rates. If you need expensive treatment they still have to pay for it. Therefore, they will try to sue you to get their money 192.124.26.250 (talk) 15:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

They'll sue you for premiums or for money they have to shell out? If you don't incur them any cost, it doesn't seem worth their while to sue you for such meagre amounts. --Dweller (talk) 15:10, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

For the premiums of course. If you need medical treatment they have to pay. And 80 Euros per month to be paid forever is not that meagre. (and when they stop giving you the student tariff it probably becomes more than 200 Euros)

This is exactly how it works in Germany! Unless I can proof that I am insured elsewhere, I am forced (by law) to continue to pay the fees. But back to my main question: Does anyone know if I need to turn to my GP or rather to the nation-wide NHS body in order to get a certificate described above? Many thanks again! --80.194.187.112 (talk) 22:00, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Have a look at the forum on http://www.deutsche-in-london.net/. They are usually pretty knowledgeable on these things. 109.150.107.49 (talk) 22:48, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

My understanding is you're not a German citizen or otherwise don't plan to go back to Germany. If so [1] may be useful. In such a case you probably want to Abmeldung (deregister) if you haven't already and this may help convince them, perhaps along with the NHS information that you can cancel your insurance. However from what I read it's still likely to be a palaver since the law is new and/or not well drafted and the companies and people involved don't yet have resonable or well known policies for dealing with cases like yours. However from discussions like e.g. [2] [3] you're right, you definitely do want to get it sort out, particularly if you have any remaining connection to Germany or may one day go back there. Now if I'm mistaken and you plan to return to Germany soon after your Masters in the UK, from what I read e.g. [4] [5] [6] it may be better to put your insurance in 'Anwartschaft' meaning you still pay a small maintence fee but your policy is put on hold until you go back to Germany and have it re-activated. If you have public insurance this may be slightly more difficult but from what I read should still br possible for a 1 year stay abroad. Cancelling it may make it more difficult or more costly to try to get insurance when you go back. Nil Einne (talk) 13:20, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

October 28

This statement is false.

What is the solution for this paradox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.82.129 (talk) 00:23, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The article Liar paradox. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:33, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The proper response is, which statement?

It has two problems. The central one is that the truth or falsity of a statement is about what it points out in reality. A statement is inherently intentional. The second problem is that the statement is vague. If you try to specify it to remove the vagueness you end up getting a paraphrase something like "The statement (that X) is false." But what is "that X"? It can only mean "The statement (that the statement (that x) is false) is false" leading to "The statement(that the statement (that the statement (that X) is false) is false) is false" and so forth in an infinite regress. The sequence of words actually has no meaning (it is just mere sound, flatus vocis, not an actual statement) because it never points to an actual claim about some real fact. The statement never approaches reality. For all sorts of approaches some less helpful than others, see self-reference. μηδείς (talk) 00:35, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

There are also such things as Many-valued logic systems that can resolve these paradoxes in a meaningful way. Buddy431 (talk) 04:31, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

It's not actually a paradox. It only looks like one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

"This Statement is False" doesn't make a meaningful assertion that can be proven to be true OR false, in my opinion. It is a cute semantic trick but not a true paradox (as bugs points out). HominidMachinae (talk) 07:14, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

To reiterate my above statement, there are some systems of logic where such a statement can be assigned a truth value (although you are correct, in that it is neither true nor false, but it does have a definite truth value). Buddy431 (talk) 18:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, Russel's paradox doesn't make an assertion at all, it's just a concept: the set of sets that don't contain themselves. So the liar paradox could be put into the same format, and then it becomes "the observation that falsifies itself". I think dismissing it is the cute semantic trick.  Card Zero  (talk) 08:08, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The observation that falsifies itself about what? HominidMachinae, BaseballBugs and Medeis (?!) above have it right. To say that a statement is false is to say it makes an incorrect claim about some actual state of affairs. A sequence of sounds doesn't have a truth value unless it is actually about some thing. Otherwise it is just a sequence of sounds. μηδείς (talk) 10:32, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Demanding that a statement has to have a subject makes things more convenient, and less fun. You could also say "a set whose members can't be itemised has no meaning", or that negative numbers are absurd (and make dark of the things which are in their nature excessively obvious and simple). Besides, the statement does have a subject - it has a non-resolving, recursive subject.  Card Zero  (talk) 12:36, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The apparent "paradox" is a result of the mistaken assumption that "this statement is false" is an actual logical statement... which it ain't. As one of my math teachers once said, "If you start with false assumptions, you're liable to get interesting results." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Bugs, the article Liar paradox has a section dealing with the formal logic structure of the statement - it is a logical statement, or at least can be formulated as one. As I repeat yet a third time, there are certain types of formal logic systems that can actually assign a truth value to statements like this. But that would actually require reading the references supplied, something you're obviously not too big on. Here's another one for you to ignore. Buddy431 (talk) 14:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

The phrase "this statement" cannot be assigned a "truth value". No way, nohow. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

To put it another way, "this statement is false" has the same truth value as "this statement is true", namely none, because neither one qualifies as a "statement" in logic. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah yes, the things we assume to be true without ever consciously realising we're doing so. It would be a very long list. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:41, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Modern texas

Well I was wondering if somebody could help me. Please tell me how much modern texas is compared to the old west. Also if two people were to agree could you legally have a gunfight? Also I no that in cities this wouldnt be the case but in little towns to lots of people ride horses around? Thanks for reading please reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imazebra444 (talk • contribs) 01:59, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Duels are outlawed specifically in Texas. Even in states where they're not specifically outlawed, the participants would certainly be arrested for whatever violence they committed during the duel.

Horse-riding is pretty much only a hobby nowadays, but you can find places all over the country where people ride them for fun or sport. (Where I grew up in Massachusetts is very much a suburban area, but there are sometimes horses walking down the street, as there's a stable nearby.) Also, some parts of USA still have Mounted Police.

But do people actually ride horses to get from one place to another? Or to go down to the saloon? No.

The "Old west" is dead and gone. Even most of the old abandoned "ghost towns" have been demolished and replaced with housing developments and Walmarts as the suburbs grow outwards. APL (talk) 03:09, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

[[:File:Urban cowboy Poster.jpg|thumb|right|Texan national dress on display, nicely accessorized with a bottle of Lone Star Beer.]]

(edit conflict) Modern Texas is nothing like the old west. It certainly has a distinctive culture compared to the rest of the U.S., but even within Texas, it is a very diverse place. Austin is a very different sort of place from the Dallas–Fort Worth metroplex, East Texas is quite distinct from West Texas, etc. Also, please note that the old west was never like the old west. The old west you find in Western films and novels is basically to the real "Old West" as the Harry Potter stories are to modern England. You are as likely to find gunslingers in the real "old west" as you would be to find wizards running around England. Events like the Lincoln County War and the Gunfight at the O.K. Corral really happened, but they were abberant events, and last as stories because of their fantastic nature. Crime existed, but then again, it did before the Old West, it does today, and it will in the future. --Jayron32 03:16, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

That's an unfair comparison. Many of the story-book heroes and villains of that time were based on real people, who had at least some real adventures. You can actually go visit the grave of Wild Bill Hickok or Billy the Kid, you can't go visit Harry Potter or Dumbledore.

I don't disagree with your basic point that the wild west was not as you'd think from movies. (Most folk didn't even own a handgun!) But be careful not to go too far the other way. APL (talk) 03:44, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Fine, then lets just say that Old West movies are to the real Old West as Baron Münchhausen was to 18th century Germany. Would that be a better comparison for you? --Jayron32 03:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Ok im from alberta canada so i was wondering. In the country area here lots of people still wear cowboy hats. What about there?

People wear cowboy hats all over. Lots of them in Texas too. --Jayron32 03:16, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

When I visited Texas, my impression was that the hats are probably Texas's biggest hold-over from the Old West. (Both the real and the imagined.) But as goofy looking as they are, they're also pretty practical if you live in that climate. APL (talk) 03:28, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Goofy looking? You better smile when you say that, pardner. Hat, boots, starched-and-pressed jeans, and a big-buckled belt are all standard parts of the national dress down here, acceptable on all occasions. And damn sexy on most men. I tell you what. Textorus (talk) 06:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, most people down in texas don't dress like that nowadays. The most common elements of dress from the "old west" would be first the hats,belt, and boots (most will just wear regular jeans), unless you go to the rodeo. Also, the southern drawl has mostly disappeared. People only ride horses for recreational purposes now, not as transportation. I know many people who ride horses at friend's/family member's ranches. In small towns you either drive or walk (usually drive). Also, people end up driving everywhere so the average person gets much less excercise than inman other places, combined with very large meal portions, reults in very large people (often in multiple dimensions). The "sexy" effect is usually not aimed for and typically not achieved, unless you're watching the cowboys at the rodeo. Yes, it's hot, and often humid too depending on where you live. Thank god for AC... Heck froze over (talk) 16:28, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I think I remember that there were one or two little towns in Texas where cars weren't allowed in town, so everybody (all 20 or 30 of them) rode horses or walked. You see cowboy boots, ironed jeans and cowboy hats as dress clothes pretty often, even in the big cities. You mentioned being from Alberta, Canada. From my experiences living in both places, I found the "country boy" attitude and "western" style to be very similar between Alberta and Texas. Places like Calgary and Edmonton are modern cities like DFW, Houston or San Antonio, but people dress very "western" for things like the Calgary Stampede or other heritage events. In the smaller towns, things like ranching and agriculture still provide a lot of the local income and are heavily embedded in the town's culture.Tobyc75 (talk) 22:15, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Heck froze over, who went out of his way to contradict everything I said, is either not from Texas, or doesn't get out much at all. Also, I see that anonymous IP 24.92.85.35 has removed the Urban Cowboy pic, but it has a fair-use rationale on the image page, and the IP did not bother to delete it there, so why the discrimination? Textorus (talk) 03:55, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I wasn't trying to contradict textorus. Most people don't wear the "national dress". Heck froze over (talk) 04:28, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Keep in mind, textorus, that "sexy" can be a little subjective... Heck froze over (talk) 04:28, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

It's entertaining that we find this rather ignorant OP quizzical, whereas if he'd asked this about a State/country that wasn't so well off his remarks might be interpreted as insensitive at best, or offensive. Tells you something about context. Shadowjams (talk) 09:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Despite all the (unsupported) claims to the contrary in this answer, you can still find people who ride horses for work (cowboys, tour guides, police, border patrol), and not just in Texas. National Geographic did a picture story of modern cowboys in black and white photos - inclusding some Texas ones.[7] While certainly not "lots of people" use horses, it is also certainly not true that they are only rare recreational vehicles. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 13:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Lots of people do indeed ride horses in Texas, sure, but not "riding around in little towns," as the OP asked, presumably meaning on the streets as an everyday affair, and hitching them to parking meters while they shop for groceries at Piggly Wiggly. You only see horses on town steets in parades for the 4th of July and Christmas nowadays. Textorus (talk) 07:44, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

hospitals in karnataka following triage system

Can you please give me the answer for this question — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franco cyril (talk • contribs) 02:40, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

This isn't really a question. Could you be more specific? --Ouro (blah blah) 06:45, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I think the only answer I can think of if the question is intended as written is "all of them". All hospitals must decide how to allot limited resources and there are none I can conceive of that are "first come first serve". This means that every hospital has some form of triage, be it formal, informal, following any specific scheme or system or ad hoc, they all engage in triage as a practice. HominidMachinae (talk) 07:16, 28 October 2011 (UTC)y

I agree with MoninidMachinae in that all hospitals utilize the triage system. The staff must prioritize who to treat and in what order. They might not do it very formally, but it is certainly used. I suppose a large difference is that in a hospital, you will eventually be seen. Whereas in the case of a catastrophe with a large number of injuries, there are some individuals who might be triaged and due to extreme injuries, skipped. TheGrimme (talk) 13:58, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Cloture in the US Senate

Each new US Senate sets its rules. I thought that when this Congress convened early this year, the Senate changed the cloture rule. But it is still being used. Didn't they change it? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 03:14, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe so. The cloture rules still require 60 votes to end debate. Senate Democrats recently invoked the so-called nuclear option on a few bills, but it is unclear whether this is to become standard practice, or just a unique set of circumstances. See [8]. --Jayron32 03:27, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

At the start of this Senate session, some Democrats stated that each Senate adopts its own set of rules, and is perfectly free to drop the cloture rule, by a simple majority. Republicans warned that such a move would come back to haunt them in future Senate sessions when the Republicans had a majority. I don't recall hearing that the Democrats actually took the radical step. The Constitution just says Congress has to follow its own rules, but does not state what those rules must be. One Senate cannot pass rules which are binding on a future Senate. Edison (talk) 04:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The rule change of October 6 was a minor one and dealt with cloture only indirectly. Kevin Drum: "The rule itself was an obscure and trivial delaying tactic that, until now, neither party had used for decades. It does not directly affect either cloture or the filibuster." However, the method by which the rule was changed may be important - it was eliminated by a majority vote that overturned a ruling of the parliamentarian, which is considered somewhat rare. Drum's piece is a good (short) one. Here's another good, short write-up from Sarah Binder of the Brookings Institution and George Washington University. Neutrality^talk 06:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I had in mind this past January, when I remember some members of the US Senate were talking about changing the cloture rule, and I thought that they had done it, but I guess not. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 14:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I heard a law related podcast or legal program a few years ago that talked about the central contradiction in the senate rules related to this point... namely that there's a general principle that past bodies cannot bind future bodies without consent... however because the senate turnover is almost never less than a quorum, is each new senate a "new" body, or is it a continuing body. There're plenty of complex arguments that go both ways... I think the podcast was NPR related but I don't know what it is right now. However perhaps that's a starting point for finding the scholarship on it. Simple answer is that it's not well established, and more importantly, because the Congress largely gets to set its own rules, the Supreme Court doesn't have much say in matters like this. Shadowjams (talk) 09:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

US president with math degree?

Herman Cain, currently making a big splash in the race to be the Republican nominee, holds a Bachelor's degree in mathematics (and a Master's in computer science). It occurred to me to wonder, has there ever been a president with a degree in math or physical science? I kind of doubt it; the closest I can think of is Jimmy Carter, who I believe was an engineer (his bio doesn't say what degree he took at the Naval Academy — that would be a good addition). --Trovatore (talk) 07:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately the relevant Wikipedia article List of Presidents of the United States by education doesn't list what subjects they actually studied. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:08, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

James A. Garfield had a mathematics degree from Williams College, Williamstown MA. He taught the subject for some time, and he published a new proof of the Pythagorean theorem.[9] -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:16, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

That's not what the source says. He studied some math, but that doesn't mean his degree was in mathematics, and the references aren't clear that he taught math specifically (possibly he taught some, but there's no evidence it was as a specialism). According to the article James A. Garfield he studied a range of subjects, excelling in classical languages, and taught Latin and Greek.--Colapeninsula (talk) 09:39, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Carter had a Bachelor of Science degree, which, according to other sources, was in physics; reading that biography that makes sense. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 09:26, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Herbert Hoover's degree was in geology. There's slightly more in the life sciences and medicine: Warren G. Harding had a medical degree while William Henry Harrison dropped out; Theodore Roosevelt had a wide-ranging college education and was a skilled naturalist who published on ornithology. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

A scientifically literate US President would be a very welcome change from the series of ignoramii who have held the office in recent years (decades!). God help the world if a creationist ever makes it into the Oval Office. Roger (talk) 09:43, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Over-generalization. As a registered voter in the U.S., I can think of only two ignorami in recent decades; both, alas, were elected to two terms of office, despite my votes to the contrary. Textorus (talk) 09:52, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Ignoramii and ignorami, eh. Hmm. The former is not on at all. The latter might be ok if it was a Latin noun, but it's a Latin verb (meaning "we do not know") that's been borrowed for use as an English noun. Ignoramuses is the only appropriate plural, methinks. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 10:00, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Correctamus! (n., fm. L. Lat. v.t. correctamare, adapted fm. pr. perf., correctami sunt, lit. "we have been corrected." Textorus (talk) 12:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, just to be annoying, a verb from "correctamare" would have to be "correctamamus"; "correctamus" would come from "correctare", which could conceivably be a Latin verb, meaning, I suppose "to correct emphatically", made from the participle "correctum", which is actually from "corrigere" (the basic verb "to correct"). "Ignoramus" comes from "ignorare". Adam Bishop (talk) 07:46, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, but you're overlooking the need for the passive voice in my extremely hypothetical construction. "Correctamamus" would be active voice, and present indicative, not present perfect, also.  :) Textorus (talk) 19:24, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Were you in a coma until a few years ago? Anyway taking this back to the original question, having a degree related to the sciences doesn't guarantee scientific literacy. There's a well known medical doctor who (I'm not naming for BLP reasons although the facts are easily sourced) has tried to be a candidate before and is trying again who confusingly put his hand down when asked if he was an idiot did not believe in evolution but later clarified he was indeed an idiot did not believe in evolution in a follow up. Edit: Looking in to it again (I last saw it over a year ago but of course it's came up again because the person is trying for the presidency again) it seems the person involved has been less clear cut in his book and may now be saying he does accept evolution although I'm not certain of this and have no desire to read his book. Nil Einne (talk) 16:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

all this squinting is making my eyes hurtAerobicFox (talk) 17:50, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Thomas Jefferson studied "mathematics, metaphysics, and philosophy" at the College of William and Mary, including the works of Isaac Newton. The Wikipedia article states that he received a degree "with highest honors." A biography "The road to Monticello: the life and mind of Thomas Jefferson" By Kevin J. Hayes, page 57, says that he did not receive a degree, though he had completed the requirement stated when he entered the college. Other books state he did receive the degree. Under the new requirements, he would have been required to attend for 4 years rather than the 2 years stated when he entered. Rather than attending another 2 years, he left and studied law. He had stated that he hoped to learn mathematics at the college. Prof. William Small taught him mathematics and astronomy. He learned calculus from William Emerson's "Doctrine of Fluxions." He learned mechanics from Emerson's "The principles of Mechanics," and later in life designed various water mills after illustrations in the book to compare their efficiencies. He was likely the only US President to have studied Newton's Principia which he quoted, in Latin, in communications to Congress while he was Secretary of State. He used mathematical physics in designing a proposed standard unit of length based on the oscillation of a pendulum. He was an architect, so geometry was likely a subject in which he delved. He admired Euclid, as did Abe Lincoln, who mastered the six books of Euclid. Jefferson was an inventor of various ingenious mechanical devices, and used the calculus, [10], in designing an improved moldboard plow with the shape of least resistance. Jefferson used a mathematical argument for a new system of apportionment of Representatives. Jefferson wrote to a student in 1799 of the importance of various branches and levels of mathematics, and of their use to him and to anyone: [11]. (The compilers of the letters consider "fluxions" to be differential calculus). In 1824 he wrotea review of Patrick K. Rodgers' mathematical treatise, praising the work of "Lacroix in mathematics, Legendre in geometry...and Laplace". He contrasted British and French approaches to teaching differential calculus. The actual level of math he learned was likely surpassed in the engineering training of Hoover and Carter, but he stands very high for his achievements as a President born in the 18th century, and for his continued use of and enthusiasm for higher mathematics. Hoover co-authored a book on the economics of mining in 1904, and his writings referenced differential calculus, so he was no slouch, and clearly had a higher level of math than any president since Carter at least. A 1920 article quoted his onetime supervisor in geology that Hoover "kept up and applied his higher mathematics as we see such studies used only by the most competent class of engineers." Jimmy Carter, on the other hand got a D in "his persistent bugaboo, differential calculus" at Georgia Tech, where his studies began in 1942. (Right in there with ya, Jimmy) Later, at the Naval Academy, studying statistics he wrote he didn't "get" permutations and combinations. The Wiki article doesn't mention over his math problems. (Any mention of one subject might be "undue weight.") Google Books showed me no works discussing differential calculus and other 20th century presidents. Edison (talk) 17:08, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Awesome answer, Edison. Textorus (talk) 04:04, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I'd guess China has the highest percentage of people with science and engineering degrees in its leadership. Personally I think the US could do with a bit of their type thinking for term or two rather than a bunch of lawyers. Dmcq (talk) 11:19, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

(Bearing in mind we've given suitable attention to the US.) Here in the UK, Margaret Thatcher had a degree in chemistry. Three Prime Ministers have, since the war, had no university education: Winston Churchill, James Callaghan and John Major. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 11:25, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Thatcher seems to be the only UK case since 1900. Stanley Baldwin briefly studied at Mason Science College before going into the family iron manufacturing business and Arthur Balfour had a degree in "moral sciences". Gladstone had a degree in Classics and Mathematics. Hut 8.5 13:14, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

• According to our article academic major, the concept of a major didn't exist until 1910, so no president prior to Kennedy had a degree in a particular subject. --M@rēino 20:23, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Over the bounding main

It occurs to this landlubber to wonder: assuming a calm sea and a wind blowing in the direction of travel, would the speed of a sailing vessel - a big one, like the Mayflower or the Mary Rose, not a small modern-day pleasure craft - be equivalent, or nearly so, to the speed of the wind?

• In which case, could a sailing ship actually have travelled faster, on occasion, than a modern-day powered ocean liner, given a high windspeed? The sailing ship article does not address this point.
• And 3rd question: more specifically, how many days would it likely have taken Othello to get from Venice to Cyprus? I seem to recall that some character in that play seems to make a lightning fast voyage between the two points, but perhaps that was poetic license on the Bard's part. Textorus (talk) 08:48, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Taking your questions in the same order:

• Given a "calm sea" the wind would necessarily be quite light. One would have to subtract the effect of the drag of the water from the wind speed to get the actual speed of the ship. Hulls of the Mayflower or Mary Rose type had quite high drag so getting close to wind speed ain't gonna happen.
• A high wind speed is incompatible with a calm sea.
• Othello's speed I leave to others who know more about the ships of that era and the sailing conditons in the Med.

A modern sailing boat can easily exceed the speed of the wind while reaching (wind coming from the side). Roger (talk) 09:11, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Sailing boats become very unstable in high winds and you end up having to reef the sails in order to slow down and avoiding capsizing. You can't just keep going faster and faster as the wind gets faster and faster. --Tango (talk) 16:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

HMS Victory, "one of the fastest first rate ships of the line at her time", could manage a "maximum recorded speed was 10-11 knots, approximately 12 miles per hour" (about 20kph)[12]. The source quoted is a document in the Public Record Office. Victory was a lot bigger than Mary Rose or Mayflower, but could carry much more sail and had a couple of centuries' advantage in the hull design department; so I expect the earlier ships would haver been slower. The most modern liner in the Cunard fleet, the MS Queen Elizabeth, has a top speed of 23.7 knots, while her 1938 namesake could do 29 knots. Alansplodge (talk) 17:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Of course, l'Hydroptère made over 50 knots, and modern multi-hulls have been recorded with >30 knots over a 24h period. For "real" ships, the Champion of the Seas managed 465 NM in 24h, for nearly 20 knots, and Preußen claimed over 20 knots under good conditions. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 18:21, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

A critical factor in the speed of a sailing ship along a given route is the direction and intensity of the prevailing wind and currents. For example, the Mayflower needed 66 days to cover the roughly 5280 km (3280 miles) from England west to Massachusetts, but only 31 days to cover the same distance sailing east. The reason for this difference is that the prevailing wind and current both trend eastward across the North Atlantic. The Mayflower's speed with a favorable wind and current averaged about 7 km/hour. Against the prevailing wind and currents, its speed averaged about 3 km/hour. A voyage across an ocean would tend to be a bit slower than a voyage through coastal waters (like that from Venice to Cyprus) because of the intensity of storms on the open ocean and the inevitability of being blown a bit off course. The sea distance from Venice to, say, Larnaca in Cyprus is roughly 2450 km (1520 miles), according to Searates.com. Prevailing winds and currents from Venice to Cyprus are favorable for most of that route. (Winds tend to be westerly or northwesterly. Currents tend to be northwesterly along the Italian coast of the Adriatic; a northeasterly cross-current would prevail off of Greece, then a favorable northwesterly current would prevail east of Crete.) So, if we assume a speed similar to the Mayflower's return speed of 7 km per hour, a voyage from Venice to Cyprus would take 14–15 days. That would have been something like the normal speed. A voyage taking, say, 10 days (with very favorable winds and a motivated crew) might have been considered "lightning-fast" at that time. Marco polo (talk) 18:35, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to all for the enlightening answers, especially Marco, who is obviously as expert on ancient travelling conditions as his namesake. Textorus (talk) 03:47, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

It took 2 or 3 weeks to get from Venice to Cyprus in the Middle Ages too, and that was such a common voyage that I know there is lots of Venetian information about exactly how long the trip would take (I just can't recall where to find it at the moment). Cyprus was an important trading centre and was eventually directly controlled by Venice. It took longer going the other way though, as long as three months. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:22, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Huh. I never realized that return voyages could take much longer than the original ones. Like the extra hour required for westbound transatlantic flights, only MUCH worse.  :) Textorus (talk) 16:26, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

It could be VERY MUCH worse; see this New York Times article from 1912. A liner came to the aid of a sailing barque which had been trying to sail from Pensacola to Montevideo but had made little progress in 14 weeks because of lack of wind and contrary currents. The crew had been living on one biscuit a day for 40 days. (My grandfather was first officer of the liner during WWI). Alansplodge (talk) 17:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Wow, I will never complain about airline food, or the lack thereof, again. The other three articles on that link are fascinating too, thanks for posting. Textorus (talk) 18:26, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I found one reference that it took 16 days to get from Spoleto to Acre in 1218, which is roughly the same (maybe a little shorter) as Venice to Cyprus. But that was considered fast, so it three weeks was probably normal. Adam Bishop (talk) 16:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Paradox

Is there any real paradox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.82.128 (talk) 17:14, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Could you elaborate on your question? --Jayron32 17:18, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

In particular what you mean by "real". --Mr.98 ([[User talk:Mr.

98|talk]]) 17:56, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Real meaning actual paradoxes in nature.

Sure - Russell's paradox, or Curry's paradox involve true statements that lead to real contradictions in certain mathematical systems. They are only "resolved" in that the entire mathematical system is declared faulty, and replaced by ones that don't contain such paradoxes. But within the system, they are about as real of a paradox as you can get. Buddy431 (talk) 18:10, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Those paradox for me is similar to a computer glitch, or maybe im interested in knowing if there is any paradox that has not been resolved.

What exactly was not clear to you from the previous thread posted by you on this exact same topic? Beeblebrox (talk) 19:52, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Sure, Gerrit and Peter. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Sodexho foods prior locations

Hi, I was employed be Sodexho foods in Burlington,Vermont at the University Of Vermont from Sept 2002 to Feb of 2006. I have not been able to make proper contact to varify my employment.Has another company taken over? How do I varify my employment,is ther a number I can contact? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.213.36.2 (talk) 19:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Looks like they changed their name, dropping the h to become Sodexo. Don't know about that particular location, but general contact info for the parent company is at [13]. Short version: SODEXO (Head office) 255 quai de la Bataille de Stalingrad 92130 Issy-les-Moulineaux France +33 (0)1 30 85 75 00 . Beeblebrox (talk) 20:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

You may find it easier or more convenient to contact Sodexo USA. Marco polo (talk) 01:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

What is this puzzle please?

[14] (4915kb) Kittybrewster ☎ 20:15, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Looks like something similar to a puzzle (based on the concept of tensegrity) that used to be sold under various names, including "Plato's Secret". See the third entry on this page. Deor (talk) 22:10, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

PETA

What is PETA's stance on aboriginal tribes that are still in existence but use animals for food, fur, etc? Barbaricslav (talk) 20:56, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

From The PETA practical guide to animal rights[15]: "PETA's quarrel is not with true subsistence hunters who honestly have no choice but to hunt or to fish in order to survive." Which seems to more or less answer it — they don't really care about them, probably because they are so reasonably scarce as to not have much of an effect on anything at this point. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:36, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

October 29

2011 Thailand floods

Im heading to Thailand in November but I havent heard anything about wheather trips should be cancelled or rescheduled. Is it safe to travel to Thailand? Portillo (talk) 00:16, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

According to this article, the U.S. State Department (foreign ministry) advises avoiding travel to Bangkok and other areas threatened by flooding. However, as the article points out, some areas of Thailand, including some popular tourist destinations, are not affected by the flooding, and the main international airport remains open. On the other hand, the main international airport is on the outskirts of Bangkok, and according to this article, there are concerns that flooding might overwhelm the airport. Marco polo (talk) 01:19, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

It sounds like you may be from Australia, in that case your government's advisory is here [16]. It seems none of the areas are 'do not travel' due to the flooding at this time, only places affected by the South Thailand insurgency but flood affected areas including Bangkok (except for the main airport) are 'Reconsider your need to travel'. If you have one, you may want to contact your travel agent (or check their webpage). Ditto if you have travel insurance, you may want to check their webpage or contact them to see how your coverage is affected. This could also provide advice on whether you should amend or cancel your trip, and whether it will cost you. Also make sure they have contact info so can contact you if the need arises. If you haven't travel insurance yet, be aware any travel insurance you get now probably isn't going to cover travel to the affected areas. E.g. [17] [18] [19] [20]. (For Australia it sounds like the cut off date was 10 or 11 October.) From what I read, even if you have travel insurance and your plan was to travel to the affected areas, if it's far away enough in November you may not be able to cancel your trip at the current time and be covered for cancellation expenses but you'd need to check with your insurer for the specifics that apply to you. Nil Einne (talk) 06:47, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Portillo (talk) 07:03, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Anyone aware of 'The Theory of Dissimilar Sub-consciousness in Molecules' by Nin Ka Umpup, Rahenar, Adishon?

WP:DNFTT
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
1. Do you agree that if there was disharmony in the universe it would not be able to exist and self distruct. I will tell you why - in disharmony there would be contending pulls in many dis-similiar directions, as propagated by Danny Rahenar (Einstein's student) in his rejoinder to the string theory of evolution. Thus causing a fission like situation - breaking it up, not dis-similiar to an atomic fission. This is very unlike the fusion imploding as seen in a hydrogen nuclear energy. 2. In his theory - Atomic theory of sub consciousness - the great American Chinese scientist (Mr. Nin ka Umpup ) from Univ. Of California - San Deigo , has proved that in every molecule there remain some atoms, who sub consciously can behave unlike there main properties as atrributed to them. Now bringing both the above theories together another Scientist - Ms. A. Adishon - has actually added both the hteory of Rahenar and Umpup - and proved that a person when they die should actually cease to exist or go to hell or heaven (whatever are your Believes) but if the person has had a disharmonious life like the atoms in Mr. Rahenar's theory then the behave subconsciuosly ant do not cease to exist. And to avoid a streching the universe string as the string theory, these people remain witihn realms of earth atmosphers. This is commonly what unscietific people call ghosts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.95.196.251 (talk) 08:30, 29 October 2011 (UTC) You have answered the only question you asked. We're here to provide references, not our own opinions, or our agreements or disagreements with propositions you choose to offer. If you have any actual questions that require references, please ask. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 09:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC) Ozian Jack is quite right. Yet we could ask what exactly "disharmony" is supposed to mean. Since I see everything through musical metaphors, the term immediately makes me think of Consonance and dissonance. And I can't help but note that our harmony page is about simultaneous pitches, and also that, musically speaking, once you have harmony, the existence of dissonance is unavoidable. And as I can't imagine "disharmony" meaning anything other than dissonance, I might conclude that disharmony and harmony are two sides of the same coin, if I were to respond to this non-question. I might also say that if you want to get scientificky, our pages Harmonic oscillator, resonance, harmonic, and anharmonicity might be of interest. I might also note the relationship between string theory and vibrating strings. Pfly (talk) 09:59, 29 October 2011 (UTC) Also not answering, but many musicians have reflected that there's just as much music in the rests and pauses between the notes as in the notes themselves. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 10:07, 29 October 2011 (UTC) Who's the Nin ka Umpup? WP:DNFTT. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:12, 29 October 2011 (UTC) Adishan also = addition. Not sure what "Rahenar" is, except a near palindrome. Well, you've got to admire the really creative ones, anyway. Adam Bishop (talk) 11:37, 29 October 2011 (UTC) (answering the question) No, I don't agree. Dbfirs 12:03, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Freemdom of information act/

Question (1) Can a private citizen for file for ( Freedom Of Information Act.)? Question (2) If so how and where if its a County and or a Township ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.57.131.223 (talk) 12:04, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

1. Assuming you are talking about the FOIA in the United States, yes — and it's very common.

2. Well, this gets tricky. FOIA is a federal act — it doesn't apply to state governments, much less municipal ones. This page lists state-by-state FOIA equivalents.

This page and the other one I linked to are great resources for learning how to use FOI laws, how to submit requests, what to expect back. It's not hard, but there is a specific form of the letter that you'll need to write in order to get successful replies. You should also be aware that there are lots of exemptions for various federal and state laws, and you may not be able to get what you want. But all they can do is say no, so it's always worth a try. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:14, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Polished cotton

Wahts the difference between polished cotton and ordinary cotton?--92.28.78.220 (talk) 13:53, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

According to web resources, it's cotton that has been made shiny, either by chemical treatment or by interweaving with satin. Looie496 (talk) 15:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

So are shirts made fronm polished cotton usually more expensive than the plain cotton ones?--78.150.226.155 (talk) 19:16, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Bokassa family - farflung French citizens

According to our article on Bokassa, the dictator of Central African Republic, as a young man:

saw some combat during the First Indochina War before his tour of duty ended in March 1953....During his stay in Indochina, he married a 17-year-old Vietnamese girl named Nguyen Thi Hué. After Hué bore him a daughter, Bokassa had the child registered as a French national. Bokassa left Indochina without his wife and child, as he believed he would return for another tour of duty in the near future.

Does anyone know what happened to them? BrainyBabe (talk) 20:01, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Lots of interesting information in this transcript of an article in the New African. As of 2008, they were running two Vietnamese restaurants in France. Warofdreams talk 16:56, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! BrainyBabe (talk) 13:18, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

October 30

Onions

Are onions (typical white onions that you would buy in a grocery store in the US) less strong / pungent (both in terms of taste and smell) than they were approximately 15 years ago? Are children more sensitive to onions? Or is there some other explanation for the weak onions I have observed? 184.98.189.222 (talk) 03:31, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Are you sure you didn't luck out with some nice Vidalia onions, which are noticeably milder and sweeter than the regular ones? Onions being Texas's major crop, the Texas A&M website has a detailed history of the development of onion varieties over the past century. If that doesn't answer your question, you might email the good folks at the National Onion Association, who do a lot of public education. Or perhaps easiest of all: next time you are in the grocery store, ask to speak to the produce manager, who likely has vast knowledge of the particular onions being sold in your locality. Textorus (talk) 13:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Without making rude assumptions about the age of the OP, this article: The Effect of Age on Taste says, "Scientists have known that as a person's tongue ages, it will naturally lose taste buds. Hendricks, Calasantiand Turner (1988) noted that the number of taste buds on the tongue do stay constant until the age of fifty when their numbers begin to decline. When this happens, any certain number of taste buds could be lost, thus causing a decrease in taste ability." Another article: The association between smoking and smell and taste impairment in the general population says, "Heavy smokers of 20 or more cigarettes per day had significant increased risks for impairment in both senses" (ie sense of smell and taste). May I suggest that you discount these factors before you blame the onions. Alansplodge (talk) 14:51, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

The answer is mainly economics. Farmers have been steadily increase the amount of potash fertiliser to increase yields and shorten growing time. Grow them in the garden with low-potash organic fertiliser and they'll make you weep. Plant early and leave them in longer and they can still reach the same size. See section here on Feeding Onions for the reason why.[21] This applies to a lot of crops, even apples orchards are best fertilised by sheep alone, since too much potassium leaves the apples tasting very bland because they grow too fast without taking up the other minerials that boosts the flavour. Also, I now remember from personal observations, that even heavy smoking (circa 60/day) does not provide protection against syn-Propanethial-S-oxide. Conflicting interests: I have grown onions – organically. So blame the supermarkets for putting profit before flavour. --Aspro (talk) 15:37, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

There's several possible reasons I can think of for an objective change in pungency. First off, there's been a rise in the popularity of sweet onions (low sulfur onions) over the years. When I was growing up, you could get them occasionally, but they were much more expensive than regular onions. Now with modern shipping practices, you can find them much more readily and cheaply. Another issue is location. I don't know if you've moved in the past 15 years, but I did to Washington state (home of the Walla Walla Onion) and here about half the onions in the supermarket are sweet onions, which cost about as much as the "regular" onions, so if you aren't paying attention you can easily pick up sweet onions instead of regular onions. (Sulfur content in the soil has an effect on onion strength, so even if it's the same variety, being grown in a different soil could change pungency.) A final point, you mention "white" onions. There is typically a distinction between "white onions" and "yellow onions". The more common yellow onion typically has a much stronger flavor than the white onion. So if you grew up using yellow onion, but are now using white onions, that may account for the change. -- 174.24.217.108 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC).

Could I get any compensation for filming crimes in progress?

You see, if the world doesn't end by December 21, 2012, I'll give society a 1-week grace period, in case they try to put off self-destruction in order to wait for a lot of us to crawl out of bomb shelters, or something.

Once that grace period ends on December 28, if my life isn't improving the way I'd hope, then I may go to Quindaro street or its vicinity; the worst part of Kansas City, Kansas, and try to film crimes in progress from my cameraphone as I either drive past, or am parked from a curbside.

If a perpetrator notices and shoots in my direction, I'll still attempt to flee, but if they make a successful hit, I will either get injured and race to the hospital, or have died a hero. Maybe my family will be compensated well.

But if I survive regardless, could turning in video evidence of crimes earn me a reward for every crime I turn in? (What other results would occur, and after I upload them onto YouTube?) The idea here is to resort to catching crimes on video in order to pay off big college debts with the rewards, because in this economy, it's harder to have access to a "normal" type of income. --Geroya Riskami (talk) 06:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

_{PS: The Lord wouldn't confine me to hell for knowingly taking a life-threatening risk in order to turn my life around, would he? If so, what passage of the Bible and/or any religion's scriptures backs it up? --Geroya Riskami (talk) 06:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)}

Ya know, bud, I think your chances of winning the lottery are probably as good as this dream scheme. You'd be almost certain to make more money, and make your family a lot happier, by mowing people's lawns or shoveling snow off their driveways, IMO. PS - I checked my email and God says, listen to good advice when you hear it. Textorus (talk) 07:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I am already 9 years along in college. I wanted to quit long ago but I was already over my head in college debt. The last event I wanted was for it to come back early and overtake the little income I have after rent. --Geroya Riskami (talk) 07:37, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

You've been in college for 9 years and still haven't graduated? You need to learn when to quit! Drop out of college (you clearly aren't getting anywhere with it and are just building up more debt) and get a job. I know the job market isn't great the moment, but there are still jobs out there if you look for them and are open-minded about what you do. --Tango (talk) 12:56, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Generally speaking the only way you're going to make money fighting or filming crimes is if there is a reward, or if you are in some form of law enforcement. I'm also a little confused by your conjunction of what appears to be Christianity and Mayan eschatology. Why don't you just become a police officer or something directly useful, if that's what you're interested in doing? --Mr.98 (talk) 14:28, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Bizarre question. DO NOT ATTEMPT (This borders on medical advice) The only crime you are likely to find going on in broad daylight in that part of KC is drug dealing. Violent crime is too rare to catch on film without weeks of work (unless you bring it on yourself), even in the most dangerous neighborhoods. The police aren't going to give you money for videos of drug deals (insufficient evidence to make an arrest anyway). Drug dealers don't like to be filmed, believe it or not and if you carry out this plan the only result I can imagine is that you will become the victim of a crime. If you get your ass kicked for filming someone with their "custies," no one is going to call you a hero. As for the biblical legality of this "plan", I'd take a look at the Parable of the Good Samaritan and think about how it might apply. --Daniel 15:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Medical advice?! So what's the illness, what are the signs and/or symptom? Nah, I think you mean legal advice. Whacky ideas don't have disease classification AFAIK. Richard Avery (talk) 16:32, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

No I meant medical advice. I was joking, but the scheme is likely to land the OP in the hospital. --Daniel 16:34, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Prevention is better than cure! Alansplodge (talk) 16:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Move to Korea Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 16:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank-goodness that some people want to get off their **** and explore the real world. Whilst one has a moral and legal duty in many countries not to withhold evidence which may be useful in the solving of crimes (for no reward), it is the normal day job for many free lance photo-journalists to work on the fringes of normal society to earn their honest dollar. 'Compensation' is in loose legal terms, a remedy for a loss suffered, which is not applicable in this scenario – so if your going into journalism, a good dictionary would also be of asset. News only has a sort life, so you might want (really need) to find organizations that can syndicate you footage both quickly and for the best price. Citizenside is one organization that comes to mind. Also, choose some suitable equipment. WiFi cards now exist so that even if you get the Camera stolen the footage can still be sent as it is recorded to a recorder securely bolted in the trunk or some place. Get and keep receipts for everything you spend so that you can claim it back against tax. Good luck and if it does work out badly, make sure your family lets us know where to sent the flowers. --Aspro (talk) 17:31, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Best case scenario if you try this is to receive a sever beating and earn the ire of the local cops. Worst case is getting killed. Bad idea, don't do it. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Then you can't be the same Beeblebrox that was voted "Worst Dressed Sentient Being in the Known Universe" (seven times). Yeah, but maybe he's right Geroya Riskami. Stay under your rock and don't poke your head out. Remember that old adage: born under a rock, died under a rock. It's a dangerous world out here. So I'm going to treble-bolt my doors and blast away at anyone that tries to enter. Quick! Where's the bleach -there's a spider in my bath!--Aspro (talk) 21:03, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Aspro, there might be slight difference between hiding in your house shooting anyone who knocks and making a unauthorized documentary about your local dope spot with the intention of showing it to the police. --Daniel 21:42, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

If you find you have hours to spare, want to do some work and earn money without being able to get a proper job, have you considered trying magic, learn something like telekinesis in your spare time. much less dangerous, and potentially greater rewards. My reccomendation would be to get two rather small plants, same species, same size, put them in the same pot, give them a couple of days to get settled in, then pick one of them and sit watching it, trying to induce it to grow faster. It may take some weeks to pick the trick up, perhaps a couple of hours a day at it, maybe more, not that long compared to some full time jobs. Then, once you have finally managed to persuade something to grow an extra few inches more than the other, I suggest switching over, trying to make the smaller one catch up, to effectively double check your results. My theory is that if you can do something three times in a row, and I would count that as two, then surely you must be having some effect (If it doesn't catch up the result may have been contaminated, so start again, though with all that experience to make it quicker). Having made that start, then you can move onto larger projects, but don't mke the mistake of trying them out for a month or so, finding that nothing much is happening and, having forgotten by then about the plants, just assume it is all a waste of time. 148.197.80.214 (talk) 19:20, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Why do we save old keys?

The other day one of the door knobs at work was changed. The contractor keeps the original and cut ten for our use. On one keyring we have the truck key and two door keys. I went to use the door key and found it didn't work. I assumed that the key hadn't been cut properly and went to get another. I then noticed that there was an extra key on the ring that was for the new lock. The person putting the new key on had left the old key on even though the old lock had been thrown out. I realised that we had lots of useless keys around, including some that are for buildings we no longer use and now belong to others. I'm not exempt from this and have about a dozen outdated keys of my own but why do we do it? CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 07:42, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Cannot say WHY, but you are definitely not alone in this. I used to keep many old keys, keys I found, keys for places I no longer live at, keys from lost padlocks and suchlike. Okay, now that I wrote this sentence I kind of thought of a reason for this, though it's stupid: A large set of keys looks nicer (in what quantifiable terms I do not know) than a small one. This used to really piss of my ex-girlfriend, who said the constant jingling used to drive her crazy. Maybe it's a psychological thing: having keys means you can get access to places, or you feel secure because you have a tangible connection to your home, i. e. a place you go to that you can lock and keep safe from the outside?

Counterexample: my folks had bought a house in the country three years ago, and they, in principle, only have ONE front door key, which stays in the door most of the time anyway, because there's literally always someone home. So, they don't actually have a set of keys, they have ONE key. Now that's weird for me. --Ouro (blah blah) 08:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

In olden days having lots of keys was of evolutionary benefit, increasing the number of descendants of collectors of obsolete unlocking devices. The relevant genes of compulsive-obsessive key-savers thusly survived.

Those who discarded useless keys snuffed it without progeny and became extinct. --Incognito.ergo.possum (talk) 11:57, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Almost spilled my tea giggling. --Ouro (blah blah) 12:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Spilled your tea while reading about someone trying to get a bit of crumpet ? How apropo. StuRat (talk) 19:33, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Interesting question, Cambridge Bay. I think this tendency is widespread. Perhaps part of the answer will be found at hoarding? (Oh too weird - I went to check the link before saving, and found that what I wanted was Compulsive hoarding, whereas what I had almost directed you to, Hoarding, comes up on Google Search with the first line "A Thule culture food cache near Cambridge Bay, Nunavut Canada", its image caption.) BrainyBabe (talk) 12:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I keep them because I can't remember what they're for after awhile, and every once in awhile — one or twice in a decade — I find some lock and say, "how do I open this?", and sure enough, I find the key on my "giant old key ring". --Mr.98 (talk) 14:29, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Do we really know the key is for the lock that was thrown away, better keep it just in case. MilborneOne (talk) 15:04, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Privilege and power are very closely connected. There does appear a strong psychological drive to hold on to keys because they can continue to serve as symbolic reminder to privileges of access once held. One friend, was a little puzzled (but felt honoured never the less) to be given a pocket book from his Grandfather, that contained all the old combination filing cabinet codes that were once in his charge. Not only were all the combination changed on his grandfather’s departure, but the cabinets themselves were long since deposed of. Yet they were a very important keep-sake 'witness' to the responsibilities Grandpa once held. This to me, explains why they have value beyond their current usefulness. One might ask: why keep old photographs. They are 2 D visual connections with their past that people use, to give themselves the feeling of continuity in an ever-changing world. Primitive societies (savages to use the old term) have only their oral tradition to tell of important happenings and individuals who was once very important. --Aspro (talk) 18:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all the replies. I think we all compulsively hoard stuff to a certain extent so that may account for it. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 19:57, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Isn't a noun missing there somewhere, or something else? --Ouro (blah blah) 06:38, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Parse it as: I think we all compulsively hoard stuff to a certain extent, so that may account for it. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:30, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh, right, sorry about that. Thank You, Jack. --Ouro (blah blah) 09:45, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Old dinosaur says, "See? Punctuation does matter." Textorus (talk) 10:54, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

We live in a small Arctic community where all perishable items, fruit, milk, punctuation, etc, has to be flown in. The weather was poor and the plane didn't make it in. Thus we ran out of commas and bananas by Saturday. A new supply was flown in today. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 23:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Old keys serve a psychological function, connecting us to days gone by. We save them to retain a connection to psychological states of mind that were dominant yesterday but just memories today. Bus stop (talk) 11:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

In your particular case, the person putting on the new keys likely didn't feel it was their job to remove the old ones, since you could just as easily do that as them. And, in general, not having a key you need is a far more serious problem than having an extra key. Myself, I tend to remove old keys from my key ring, but then keep them in a junk drawer. This is because the "old key" is invariably one I can no longer identify, not one I am certain is useless. On a side note, do you really want the contractor to have unlimited access to your office by retaining a key ? That would worry me. StuRat (talk) 19:30, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

This wasn't our office but was the hydrogen generating shed. We only go there twice a day so it's easier for the contractor to have a set of keys for when work needs doing. He is well aware of hydrogen's interesting properties and takes the necessary precautions. Also, it's a small place, and everybody knows everybody, and what they are doing at 3:00 am going into her house. Actually it was a co-worker who put the building key on the ring. And it turns out the door knob used was a safety issue and it has been replaced again. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 23:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Milwaukee prohibition era news article -- chief won't fix dry agents' parking tickets

This is driving me nuts, and says something about the limitations of Google's news archive search.

Earlier today I came across an article in the archives. Later, I tried to find the article again using about a million different search techniques, but couldn't find it.

1) It was in either the Milwaukee Journal or Milwaukee Sentinel. 2) Federal prohibition agents, "dry agents," got parking tickets in Milwaukee for taking up all the spaces near a post office. They did this all the time, but finally were ticketed. 3) The police chief, Jacob Laubenheimer, refused to fix the tickets. The paper did a "humorous" bit about this, comparing Laubenheimer to Sitting Bull and saying "no fix 'em, no fix 'em" (20s or 30s stupid stereotype). 4) In the bit, the paper called the chief "implacable" and "inscrutable." 5) It was toward the second half of the prohibition era, not the first. No earlier than April 1924, and probably after 1927 or 28.

You'd think with all that, I'd be able to find the article again via Google news archives. But nooooo.

Would appreciate help.76.218.9.50 (talk) 09:05, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

And something as simple as trying your browser's browsing history didn't help? --Ouro (blah blah) 09:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I had cleared it without thinking.76.218.9.50 (talk) 23:44, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Google News didn't work for me, strangely enough, but after a few false tries, I googled this up on the regular Google page using "Laubenheimer agents 'post office'" - "Police Tags Bloom at Federal Building," The Milwaukee Sentinel, Feb. 27, 1932, p. 1. Textorus (talk) 13:28, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Wow, thanks. The mistake I made was using search terms in Google news ONLY (for more than an hour) -- I should have tried regular Google too. I won't forget that!76.218.9.50 (talk) 23:44, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. Yeah, I've run into that problem before too. It's a very odd bug in the system. Textorus (talk) 03:43, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Can people spread a venereal disease, if they have never had sexual contact?

Note: I use the term "sexual contact" to cover all types of sexual intercourse -- anal, vaginal, and oral. Can people spread a venereal disease, if they have never had sexual contact?

Let's imagine a hypothetical case. Person A and Person B never have sexual contact before for whatever reasons. They fall in love; they marry; they copulate to procreate young. Can Person A spread a venereal disease to Person B, or vice versa, upon first sexual contact with his or her significant other? Can Person B die or become gravely ill from the venereal disease? 75.185.79.52 (talk) 14:52, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I suppose it may be possible to spread syphilis in this situation, if one of the partners has congenital syphilis. --TammyMoet (talk) 15:12, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Some STI's are not exclusively transmitted sexually. Like herpes.124.170.121.252 (talk) 15:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

There's also a remote chance that one partner could get infected via a freak accident, like receiving an unscreened blood transfusion. But if both people remain totally monogamous forever, the likelihood is very low. There is no spontaneous generation of VD bacteria, if that's what the OP is worried about. Disease results from infection, not from sex itself. Textorus (talk) 15:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes (see below). Dualus (talk) 15:20, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

What are all the conditions needed to maintain a 0% chance or near 0% of spreading a venereal disease? 75.185.79.52 (talk) 15:46, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Complete isolation from humans. A number of venereal diseases such as herpes and HPV can be spread through non sexual contact. --Daniel 15:48, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

In short, you'd have to dig a hole, completely disinfect it, shield it from any contaminated air and live there until you die. Good luck with your food-supply. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 16:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Can a person still spread a venereal disease, if he or she fulfills these conditions?

-the person's mother has never been infected by any known disease, and the person in question has never faced such an illness in childhood. The person may have had illnesses like chicken pox, cold, flu, pneumonia, but that's it.

-the person donates blood, but never receives blood

-all blood donations use needles that have been sterilized, as required by law

-the person maintains absolute abstinence from all sexual behaviors and feels perfectly fine with this lifestyle, because it is his or her personal choice to remain healthy and live as long as possible

-the person is obsessed about a cleaniness

-the person does not use finger-genital contact

Now, if these conditions apply two both partners in marriage, then can the couple still spread a venereal disease? Also, can chicken pox, cold, flu, and pneumonia spread sexually? 75.185.79.52 (talk) 16:20, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I think "complete isolation from humans" and the dig-a-hole story already answered that. If you're seeking more detailed medical advice, please consult a doctor or licensed practitioner. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 16:29, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Some of the conditions that the OP mentions are likely to decrease the chances of contracting an STI, but the fact remains that STIs can be transmitted without sexual contact. The non sexual infections you name are spread through physical contact, so it is certainly easy to spread them to your sexual partner, but they aren't sexually transmitted diseases as such. --Daniel 16:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

HSV can technically spread via a handshake (see PMID 15623779) and hepatitis C can spread on shared razors or toothbrushes. Dualus (talk) 15:20, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I realise that HIV is not a venereal disease as such, but isn't it possible to acquire it non-sexually and spread it sexually? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:01, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Last time I checked, the HIV virus is transmitted by contact with another person's blood, semen, vaginal fluid, or breast milk; the virus is also detectable at extremely low levels in saliva, sweat, and spinal fluid, but - again, last time I checked, some years ago - no cases of infection via those fluids had been documented. So yes, doctors, nurses, lab workers, etc., who come in contact with the first four and have a skin tear that allows the virus to get into their bloodstream, can indeed be infected non-sexually. See HIV#Transmission. Textorus (talk) 03:38, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Also via an infelicitous blood transfusion or a pre-loved drug syringe. Having got it this way, a person can then spread it sexually. Or vice-versa. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:28, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Not just drug syringes: there was an article in the Guardian just this week that claimed the number of deaths due to infection from reused needles was higher than the deaths from mosquito-borne infection, and pointed out the discrepancy between number-of-injections and number-of-needles-imported in many developing countries. Stories of parents being asked to choose a pre-used needle to be used on their child from a tray of them. It should be noted that this isn't generally true for vaccines, as the organisations that run global vaccine programmes generally send out preloaded syringes. 86.163.1.168 (talk) 12:08, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

According to Origin of AIDS, it looks like that the origin of AIDS comes from eating bushmeat. So, it may be possible that SIV is transformed to HIV, when a person, who has eaten bushmeat, copulates with another person. 75.185.79.52 (talk) 19:53, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

can chicken pox, cold, flu, and pneumonia spread sexually? I suggest you read the articles common cold, Chickenpox, influenza, and pneumonia. Most spread via the air, though pneumonia has a wide range of causes. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but just as easily through non-sexual close contact. Dualus (talk) 15:20, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Guatemala syphilis experiment is a pretty nasty case of sexual disease being spread deliberately and very probably some of those spreading it were obsessed with cleanliness and never engaged personally in risky behaviour. 17:07, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

October 31

contractor in need

I'm a general contractor in need of customers. I specialize in kithcen and bathroom remodels, we do everything from electrical, plumbing to wall additions. I need to bring in customers, i've tried many avenues. I'm asking for advise. HELP!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mibebita (talk • contribs) 04:44, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, we won't directly help you bring in new customers, but we can give some advice on advertising, marketing and things like that (right?). So, tell us what you've tried already and we'll see what we can do. --Ouro (blah blah) 06:36, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Depending on where you are located, there may be a local small business association (no article!) of one type or another that you can ask questions of. Dismas|^(talk) 09:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I'd advise building up a good reputation in your locality. Have you some satisfied customers who would be willing to provide a reference or be willing to have their names mentioned? Have some flyers printed and go round your locality in person, speaking to householders and leaving a flyer. Stress that you will be able to do work at a time convenient to the householder and that you will not go away to another job leaving their kitchen or bathroom half-finished (assuming that these promises are achievable). Supply your name, address and contact details so that potential customers know how to get in touch with you if there is a problem. Stress that you are a local and reliable contractor. Dbfirs 09:14, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

The Small Business Administration has some programs to advise or mentor small business owners, and there's probably an office near you. I have no experience with them, but it wouldn't cost you anything to give them a call or email and see what they could help you with. I'm sure a lot of other contractors are feeling the economic pinch these days too. Good luck to you. Textorus (talk) 10:51, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Administration!! Dismas|^(talk) 10:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

The problem likely has to do with the economy. In uncertain times people are loathe to spend money on "optional" things like remodeling. The key to overcoming this might be in the way that you market your services. Viewed alone, they can be seen as an "unnecessary expense", but viewed as an alternative to buying a better (and more expensive) home, this alternative may compare favorably. Another thought, if you can find a backer, is to buy cheap homes and remodel them, with the hope of reselling them later for a profit, once real estate prices recover. Or, perhaps they could be rented out, possibly subdivided into apartments. So, you need to "think outside the (tool)box". StuRat (talk) 18:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Here in the UK, we have a TV show called Homes Under the Hammer, which airs once every weekday. At least twice a week one of the people buying a house at auction for renovation explains that they are in the same position as you - a specialist contractor where the work is drying out. They have decided to buy a property at auction and renovate it, so that they can sell it on at a profit and keep their staff in work. Might be worth trying, although obviously I have no idea what the property market is like in other parts of the world. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:18, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

The Black Adder TV Series

Listings show episodes 2 Born To Be king & 4 The Queen Of Spain's Beard----but they are shown differently in the introduction of each episode( for example--The Queen Of Spain's Beard is displayed as episode 2).Were these programs aired in the correct order? Very Confusing.94.9.66.170 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC).

See Talk:The Black Adder#Episode Order. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 12:18, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Another landlubber question - the Channel crossing

The White Cliffs of Dover as seen from France: so near, but yet so far.

Students of English history know that for centuries, down to the age of steamships and even beyond, the Channel crossing was dreaded by nearly all travellers, high and low alike. Letters, diaries, biographies, and histories are full of innumerable examples like this one (p. 7) of otherwise butch, brave men being reduced to quivering lumps of jelly by it - to say nothing of what the crossing did to the, um, weaker sex, as it was then supposed to be. Even the mere contemplation of the journey was fearsome, and many times affairs of state had to wait for days or weeks because somebody just couldn't make that short hop. The question in the back of my mind for a long time has been - WTF?? It's only 20 miles from Calais to Dover, and even on the slow sailing ships of the time, that wouldn't take more than what, two, three hours at most, right? Even a rough, choppy trip would be over very quickly. What could be so bad about that? Textorus (talk) 12:12, 31 October 2011 (UTC) <---- whose main seagoing experience was in a large canoe on a small creek

The English prince William Adelin thought exactly the same as you, and look what happened to him! --TammyMoet (talk) 12:41, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Judging by the state of the sea depicted in Turner's Calais Pier, the journey could be very rough. I've also experienced a very rough crossing some years ago onboard a large and fast catamaran... the bar closed, the alcohol shop closed and a lake of mixed spirits leaked out from under the door, people were vomiting everywhere - I've taken to calling that trip the rivers of puke and have never crossed by sea since. Astronaut (talk) 14:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

The Hoverspeed catamaran from Folkestone to Bolougne was known to locals as the "Vomit Comet". Alansplodge (talk) 23:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Textorus, as we saw with sailing routes out of Venice, early modern or medieval sailing ships were capable of about 6 km per hour under the best conditions. From Dover to Calais is about 24 miles or 38 kilometers, so let's say at least 40 km accounting for slippage due to tide and currents (about which more later). That works out to a 7-hour passage, and that's how long the journey took under the very best conditions. One reason that this passage was treacherous was the action of the tidal currents. See this page on swimming the Channel for some background. Tidal currents in the English Channel often run at 3 to 4 knots (6–7 kph). As you can calculate, an early modern sailing ship would make no headway against such a current, even with a favorable wind. Of course, this was a cross current, and it changed direction every 6 hours, so a ship crossing the Strait of Dover would typically travel in a V-shaped course: east-southeastward during the flood tide (toward Belgium), then south-southwestward (toward Calais) during the ebb tide. Another issue is that when the prevailing westerlies blow against the ebb tide, the friction causes a harsh chop to develop. (These are short, spiky waves that would toss a ship of pre-industrial size and tend to cause seasickness.) With a less common easterly wind, the same phenomenon would happen during the flood tide. Finally, the English Channel is completely open and exposed to westerly storms and winds blowing in from the open Atlantic. As such, winds can be quite fierce and wave heights higher than you would expect in an enclosed body of water. The Strait of Dover is relatively (but only relatively) sheltered from such winds compared to other parts of the Channel. However, it wasn't always convenient, for political or other reasons, to cross the channel at Calais. Sometimes it was necessary to cross a broader, rougher part of the Channel, where the passage (involving a zigzag course due to tidal currents) could take more than 24 hours and where an unexpected storm could founder a ship out of the sight of land. Marco polo (talk) 14:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

And don't forget there's also the Goodwin Sands to contend with, where "more than 2,000 ships are believed to have been wrecked", and Varne Bank.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:25, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Apparently these are just two of several banks or ledges that pose a shipping hazard in the Dover Strait alone. See this chart showing several others. Marco polo (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

The waves hitting the ship sideways caused rocking action that caused seasickness in lots of passengers. Henry Bessemer, co-inventer of the Bessemer steel process, spent a large portion of his fortune as well as investments by others designing and building a ship to make the crossing smoother, the SS Bessemer. It had an internal passenger compartment which was able to swing port and starboard to cancel out the rocking and remain stationary. It did not address and longitudinal rocking, which was less of a problem. It was opersated by a hydraulic system powered by a steam engine. As tested, it was controlled by a seaman rather than an automatic gyroscopic system, but automatic operation was envisioned for later development. The ship was designed to be reversible, so no turn-around was needed in harbor. It would just "back" all the way back to England. On the maiden voyage, the anti-rocking system worked brilliantly, but poor design of the vessel's steering caused it to crash into the dock at the French harbor. Rather than perfecting the steering, the project was abandoned, which seems a shame. Edison (talk) 19:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

William Adelin should have checked with the Reference Desk first. Thanks for the great answers, y'all; I get the picture now. Textorus (talk) 22:27, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Sometimes it is not the crossing that is the trouble, a while ago my ferry from France to Dove could not dock in Dover because the seas were too rough even in the harbour, so we had to return to France and come home by train thru the tunnel.85.211.229.139 (talk) 08:28, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

But that troublesome stretch of water has (together with some vigourous defensive measures) saved us from all kinds of unpleasantness over the years: see Battle of Sluys, Spanish Armada, Napoleon's planned invasion of the United Kingdom and Operation Sealion. Alansplodge (talk) 12:07, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, quite. Textorus (talk) 23:51, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands.

William Shakespeare, Richard II (Act II, Scene 1)

"less happier lands". Tut tut. didn't 'whoever wrote the Shakespeare plays' learn grammar? ;-) AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:13, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Sink in Laundry Room

I am purchasing a new construction home and have the choice of purchasing an upgrade to a sink in the laundry room which is downstairs. This will be my first home, and am unsure of whether or not I will use a sink in the laundry room. I am most concerned about resell value, and whether or not spending $1000 on a sink would be worth it.

It is a nice stainless steel sink with a granite counter top and cabinet underneath (downgrading to a cheap sink is not an option).

Do you kind folks value having a sink being in a laundry room? Is it something that would impact your buying of a house? Many thanks, TheGrimme (talk) 14:11, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Not having a sink in a laundry makes no sense to me. IMHO it is an absolutely essential item, not an optional "upgrade". A sinkless laundry is terriby impractical. Roger (talk) 14:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I use the sink in the laundry room for cleaning boots, garden tools, etc. that my wife would not want me to use the kitchen sink for. There is an entrance to the laundry room from the garden and I also use it a s a "mud room" to wash hands and clean myself up before going into the rest of the house. To me a sink is pretty well essential - though any sink would do this is not one of our "fine" rooms where we would bring guests (except for muddy kids who have been playing in the garden!). -- Q Chris (talk) 14:26, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I get by just fine without a laundry sink. If something is really dirty, the hose outside does the job. For anything else, the bathroom sink or bathtub works. So I don't think it's a necessity. If you like the idea of a laundry sink, I would do a little research and see if you can have something functional installed for less than $1,000. The granite counter top for a messy laundry room sink just sounds excessive. Unless you are in a very upscale neighborhood where buyers expect luxury in every corner of a house, I doubt that ordinary buyers would care enough about fancy fittings in the laundry room to bid more for the house. Marco polo (talk) 14:36, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Might be worth checking that, if you reject the $1000 sink, the builders will at least leave you with the plumbing for a sink in case you later decide you do need a sink. Astronaut (talk) 14:44, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

(OP) I thought about rejecting the $1000 sink and having a contractor put in a sink. The plumbing is directly behind the wall, but I figure to have them put in a decent sink it will probably cost at least $600. At that point, it makes sense to spend more and get a premium sink that matches the rest of the house. TheGrimme (talk) 15:19, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I suspect what you ought to do is call a real estate agent and ask them if laundry room sinks generally affect the re-sale value of a home. They probably know better than we do whether there's a lot of demand for that sort of thing amongst buyers — whether it's the sort of thing that will really be important to someone out there. It may well be; I haven't the foggiest idea. As to whether it is practical or necessary or not, that depends on your habits. I've lived in places with sinks and without them. One can easily adapt to either situation. Personally, I think every additional sink you add also adds a significant chance you'll have to call a plumber, someday! ;-) --Mr.98 (talk) 15:02, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

$1000 sounds high. Can you break that down by parts and labor? If there is already laundry room plumbing, I would think the installation would cost much less. This how-to guide says $500-$1,000. Dualus (talk) 15:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I recently had a bathroom sink and counter installed for $550: $250 for a very nice sink with a fancy real marble countertop and stainless steel fixtures and $300 for labor using a licensed plumber in expensive Massachusetts. Of course, we had a vanity in place which we kept. Still, even adding the price of a vanity, which you could have installed by a handyman for much less than the plumber would charge, I think you could get a basic sink and counter installed for no more than $600. Of course if you are buying a premium home, $400 is probably trivial. Marco polo (talk) 16:42, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Addressing the OP's questions: 1) Yes, I would like a laundry sink. 2) But it wouldn't make-or-break my buying a house. 3) However, a laundry sink is a "feature" that realtors and prospective buyers will be impressed with, whether they need one or not - how much reward you get at resale time is hard to say, fluctuations in the RE market might outweight that one item's value - but if the $1000 isn't keeping you from buying groceries this month, do it up pretty and relax. 4) Make sure your spouse agrees and likes it, or you may never hear the end of it. Textorus (talk) 18:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I only use my laundry sink for one thing, to receive the drain hose from the washing machine. If you don't get the laundry sink, make sure you at least have a drain suitable for use with a washing machine. StuRat (talk) 18:36, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

If I may, what kind of sink are we talking about here? The OP mentions a marble counter and such but I can't think of any laundry sink that has been that elaborate. This is what I think of when I think "laundry sink". My parent's house had one and it came in handy. And I'd really like to have one in my current house. I'd have put one in already but other things keep needing the money more (like the mortgage to have the house in the first place). It wouldn't make or break the purchase of a house for me (obviously as I don't have one now) mostly due to the low amount of trouble it is to put one in. Dismas|^(talk) 01:25, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I would think the general expectation that there be a sink in the laundry room would depend on where in the world you are talking about, as well as the general price-range/overall quality of the house. Of the two houses I've lived in the longest, one in Buffalo and one in Seattle, neither has a laundry room sink. In fact in both the "laundry room" seems to have been almost an afterthought--crammed into whatever extra space there was. It's possible my experience is unusual, but I would find a sink in the laundry room a welcome plus, but not at all something expected as the norm. Pfly (talk) 09:00, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Who needs a laundry tub in Seattle ? If you need to soak your clothes, just hang them outside. :-) StuRat (talk) 18:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Changing plea = perjury?

I was watching one of those many, many legal shows on TV (can't remember the title but this one starred Kathy Bates). The story raised for me an interesting point. The accused had pleaded not-guilty and had undergone cross-examination in front of the jury. Some way through, the accused said he wanted to change his plea to guilty. The prosecution asked why he didn't plead guilty earlier. That got me thinking: could the accused then have perjury added to his charges and potentially ended up with a stronger penalty (jail time or file)? After all, earlier in the trial he must have lied under oath in order to try to make himself seem innocent. Astronaut (talk) 15:56, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Unless there are lawyers watching this page, your best bet would be to read some wikipedia articles about plea bargain and such stuff as that. Something to think about, though: How often do you ever hear of someone who is found guilty, also being charged with perjury just because he claims he's innocent? I'm thinking, not often, or maybe never. Now, if a witness lies, that's another matter. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:16, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

This isn't legal advice and probably a lawyer will laugh at it for being too simplistic and inaccurate. But as our article notes, you can only be charged with perjury for lying under oath or affirmation to tell the truth. So if you just plead not guilty (which isn't under oath) or say your innocent in public or whatever, this doesn't mean you're guilty of perjury even if you're guilty. The problem only arises when you testify in your defence, which isn't required and can't be forced in a criminal trial in the US and quite a number of countries. And while I don't know how true this is, my impression is people are often advised not to testify in their defence, particularly if their lawyer believes they're guilty (partially because they know it's easily possible they'll be caught lieing which even if they aren't charged with perjury isn't going to help their defence and even if you don't caught in a lie it's still hard to sway a jury in your favour but easy to push them against you). And as anyone who's watched enough legal shows know, your lawyer can't subborn perjury, so can't encourage you to testify if they know you're going to lie, or encourage testimony which they know to be a lie (so they can't for example tell you what to say if they know it's not the truth) although this is a complicated issue (see our article for example) that also involves ethics, see [[22] for example.

Anyway [23] and [24] and [25] (see last post by Danimal) suggests in the US even when the defendent does testify in their defence and is later found guilty they're almost never charged with perjury, as it's generally going to be seen as a waste of the everyone's time since the original sentence is likely to be far longer then any perjury conviction and you still need to prove the person commited perjury and the sentence may end up being concurrent anyway. They also suggest if the person is found not guilty but it later becomes clear they perjured themselves in their testimony it's more likely.

Nil Einne (talk) 17:07, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

It is typical practice to only prosecute the most serious crime committed. It is obvious that during the commission of a murder, you are virtually certain to commit unlawful act manslaughter, assault (either technical or battery, probably both) probably occasioning grievous bodily harm (depending on how you killed them); you also could be found guilty of attempted murder (the attempt being successful!). So missing out perjury seems to fit this rule. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 17:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that's really the same thing. Most of the stuff you're referring to is part of committing the same crime (and I strongly suspect you're wrong on the attempted murder and manslaughter bit). Commiting perjury when you are on trial for a crime isn't generally seen as part of the original crime. Nil Einne (talk) 17:53, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

There do seem to be some crimes where they "throw the book at them", and charge them with all the "lesser included offenses", as well. Where this actually matters is sentencing. If the sentences are served concurrently, then only the longer sentence matters (although I suppose they could be pardoned or paroled on that one, in which case the others might still matter). But, when sentences are to be served consecutively, then the lesser included offense can have a major effect on the total length, and may even (collectively) dwarf the sentences for the main crime. I've never really understood the decision process behind consecutive versus concurrent sentences. StuRat (talk) 18:30, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

The lesser included offenses merge with the original crime. The perjury charge would be separate though. Shadowjams (talk) 02:13, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

That's an incorrect interpretation. A person can't be convicted and sentenced for the lesser included offenses as if they were committed separately from the most serious offense. As Shadowjams notes, the merger doctrine precludes this outcome. (Among other things, it would violate prohibitions against double jeopardy.) In situations where they 'throw the book at someone', each charge represents a unique crime that may have been committed at the same time as the major offense. Consider a bank robbery—there might be a charge of armed robbery, and another of possession of an unlicensed firearm, and another of dangerous driving (in the getaway car). The defendant could be independently convicted of, and sentenced for, all three offenses. On the other hand, if he were charged with larceny (a lesser included offense to robbery), he would have to be sentenced for one or the other, but not both. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:55, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't know what you're saying is incorrect. Charging an armed robber with possession of an unlicensed firearm, commission of crime using a gun, driving offenses, failure to stop, resisting arrest, etc., is exactly what I'm talking about. If all those are included and sentences are consecutive, then the prison term may be far longer than for armed robbery alone. StuRat (talk) 18:13, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

The point is that those offenses (possession of an unlicensed firearm, dangerous driving, etc.) aren't elements of the offense of robbery and therefore aren't lesser included offenses. They're separate crimes that the defendant has also committed and for which he might also be charged. You're misusing or misunderstanding the specific term of art lesser included offense; it would help a great deal if you read the articles that I and Shadowjams had linked, which explain these principles. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:16, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

But whether they are "elements of the offense of armed robbery" seems open to debate. Can you commit armed robbery without a gun ? Possibly, but it's not likely to succeed. Can you commit armed robbery without a car or using a car which is properly licensed and displaying the license plate as required ? Again, it's possible, but highly unlikely to succeed. StuRat (talk) 20:26, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Elliptical philosophical digressions aside, you're being obtuse for obtuseness' sake. Go read term of art. "Elements of the offense" are specific components of the legal definition of a particular offense—conditions that must be met for a particular offense to have been commmitted in the eyes of the law. "Elements of an offense" are not the same thing as "plot devices and props which must be present to satisfy a scriptwriter". That's as much time as I'm going to waste leading you by the nose. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:38, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for Ten's extended explanation. As for the ad hoc "practical" lines of thought, they don't tend to fly on the bar exam or in court, although I realize that's how most people think of the law. Element have very limited scopes of interpretation. Shadowjams (talk) 10:26, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

The TV show is Harry's Law, with Kathy Bates as "Harry". StuRat (talk) 18:30, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

That would be the one, yep. It occurs to me that if a guy changes his plea to guilty, why would the prosecutor do anything to try and dissuade the accused from doing so? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:44, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

microwave ovens

why does the inside plate holder rotate counter clockwise inside a microwave? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.78.56.25 (talk) 16:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

They definitely don't all rotate counter clockwise. I've owned several that rotated clockwise. --Daniel 17:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I think most I've owned have reversed everytime you start them although [26] and [27] suggests it's more commonly technically random (which may have been the case for mine too, I didn't pay that much attention). Nil Einne (talk) 17:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Mine alternates direction every time the door's been opened. Textorus (talk) 17:56, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Mine always rotates clockwise, though I think it sometimes used to rotate anti-clockwise about 20 years ago. The direction of rotation makes no difference to the heating, of course. This reminds me of older electric clocks that sometimes used to start going backwards after a power-cut. In theory, synchronous motors can run either way, and starting direction "ought" to be random, but the starting-position is critical to the direction, and wear will probably determine a pattern for the position of the motor when it stops. Dbfirs 22:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

And to answer the question that the OP might have been going for... The plate rotates to provide even cooking for your food. Dismas|^(talk) 01:08, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Ding ding ding, we have a winner! Beeblebrox (talk) 02:10, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Huh? Mine just goes 'Ding' Richard Avery (talk) 08:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Whereas mine goes "Beep. Beep. Beeeeep." Also, like Textorus's, it reverses the direction of rotation every time it's restarted: I conjecture that this is because many microwaveable products specify a pause, with or without stirring, during the heating period, and the reversal may further contribute to the evening-out of the cooking process, though I don't immediately see how. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.254 (talk) 12:08, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Coriolis effect - which way it spins depends on which hemisphere you're in. ;-) However that brings me to another question, if anyone would like to chime in. Why don't manufacturers have it so that the plate returns to the same position each time (e.g., when you put a cup in you put it at the front - wouldn't it be nice if it always returned to the front when the time was up to make it easy to get out)? Surely this would be easy enough to program? Has anyone ever seen a microwave with this function? --jjron (talk) 14:20, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Usually there is a set number of seconds per revolution - if you wish the cup handle to end up in a given place, either place the cup in the proper position for the amount of time you wish, or adjust the amount of time to get an integer number of revolutions. Collect (talk) 14:32, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

...not to mention a huge 'geek credibility' increase ;-) Richard Avery (talk) 19:26, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

That would be nice though at some point, you'd have to program it not to spin at all because the cook time was too short. Imagine if you put something in for five seconds and it took ten seconds to go through one full rotation at normal speed. If the object has to now spin around in half the time, you might spill your coffee or whatever you're heating. Dismas|^(talk) 20:24, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

And people can stop it early, too, say when it starts to boil over. I just wait 'til the time is almost up, then stop it when the object is near me. (Or add an extra few seconds when it stops on the far side.) StuRat (talk) 20:32, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Guffaw. This rather elite sub-discussion over the extremely minor inconvenience of extending your hand a mere couple of inches further reminds me of a counter-Occupy poster I saw a few weeks ago: "To the rest of the world, you are the one percent." It doesn't come up in a Google image search, can anyone else find it? Textorus (talk) 23:44, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

The good thing about our microwave is that it keeps turning after it stops cooking. Though, that does mean I can't calculate the time in sets of 6 seconds to make sure it always ends up back in the right place at the end. 148.197.81.179 (talk) 08:01, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Ha, I do like the concept that others have thought about this somewhat nerdy problem. Yeah, I had considered the problem of too short cook times making it spin too fast, but the above IP's comment raises the possibility that it could be programmed to continue to spin after the time is up in order to return it to the starting position (i.e., spinning without cooking), which would be an elegant solution to this dilemma. Re calculating the cook time to return it to the front, or stopping it early or adding extra time at the end, well maybe I'm a bit lazy, but that seems like too hard work to me :). The point is I put something in, wander off to do something else, then come back when it's finished and I'd like it at the front - I don't want to have to manually monitor the machine, and I have very precise cooking times for various things (and to be honest I'm not sure any of the ones I regularly use spins at a consistent speed, as despite starting things at the same spot and using the same time they don't always end up at the same spot). And I think this has real practical considerations; consider my cup example - when the cup finishes in the wrong spot, it's not just a matter of inconvenience to have to reach to the back of the oven, but the handle is on the wrong side to grab, potentially leading to injuries such as burns (perhaps a lawsuit would set the manufacturers straight!). --jjron (talk) 12:49, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

November 1

face vail

I was told that at my birth I was born with a vail over my face. have you ever heard of such a case before? And what does it mean if anything. Thank You <e-mail and full name removed> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.248.34.124 (talk) 00:57, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

A little Googling with the more likely correct spelling for "born with a veil" takes me to the Caul article. The line from there that you will probably most appreciate is "In medieval times the appearance of a caul on a newborn baby was seen as a sign of good luck". HiLo48 (talk) 01:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Right. In the US, Vail is most commonly thought of as the location of several fine ski resorts. In that context, any reference to 'birth' and 'vail' in the same sentence probably means your mother didn't get off the slopes in time!

--DaHorsesMouth (talk) 02:08, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Ouch, that was rude. Textorus (talk) 23:45, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

HEY READ THIS!!! (how to make a wikibot)

How do you make a wikibot,I'm doing it for the Sonic News Network?~Tailsman67~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.52.26 (talk) 14:57, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Maybe Wikipedia:Bots will be helpful? --Ouro (blah blah) 15:15, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Cool thanks.:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.52.26 (talk) 15:29, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Please don't SHOUT, especially not to get attention. --ColinFine (talk) 23:41, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

But he got to his senses later, didn't he (it's the brackets, they're like a mild sedative for the mind). --Ouro (blah blah) 06:09, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Why is Indian yogurt so delicious?

A couple years ago, I was traveling in India for a couple months. What I remember most about the food there was the dairy products, particularly the delicious yogurt. Is there anything in particular that makes Indian yogurt so delicious? Is it just a matter of people eating it just after it is prepared? Or that it is probably raw milk fresh from the cow? If I made yogurt in my house, would it taste as good? Any other tips? Thanks! Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Context can matter. Check this out. Bus stop (talk) 16:10, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, but I'd be the first to admit that there was a decent amount of crappy food there too - e.g. the ubiquitous mixed veg curry, which could be pretty bad when longhaul buses stopped at stalls along the road, or really bland (but hearty) food typical of the far north... I swear that it wasn't just context--the dairy stuff really stood out! :) Also, somehow I thought all the dairy products I ate in Varanasi were particularly good, and I was later informed that Varanasi is known for its dairy... I'm not sure how one city could have better milk than all the other cities, but who knows! Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:42, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Could it be unpasteurized? Many people believe unpasteurized milk products taste better (see e.g. United States raw milk debate). --Colapeninsula (talk) 16:34, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, like I said above, I bet that it was raw milk. I'm not sure if that's where the taste difference came from, though. If someone from India passes by, they could chime in, but I doubt that any of the silver containers of milk being transported around town had been pasteurized... Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:42, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Indian yogurt frequently is made from full-fat mik or even cream, with about 10% of fat content. Most "yogurt" in the US, by comparison, is made from water, gelatin, starch, sugar, whitening agents, acidifiers, and homeopathic amounts of pasteurised reconstituted Ersatz skim milk ;-). Seriously, check the fat content. It makes a lot of difference for yogurt. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 16:51, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Have you had Greek yoghurt? That redirects to Strained yoghurt, and mentions India. Greek yoghurt is usually live, although that article doesn't mention it and yoghurt only has a sentence about live cultures. (It's apparently low fat. I am surprised by that.) 213.122.59.44 (talk) 17:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I believe many yogurts in the US also contain "active yogurt cultures" (live bacteria). StuRat (talk) 18:04, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Indians generally sweeten their yogurt, if I remember correctly. Dualus (talk) 08:35, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Date of publication

Can someone identify the actual date of publication (not July 7 - that doesn't make sense as it didn't lash the Carolinas until the evening of July 9) for this? Thanks. HurricaneFan25 21:52, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Um, the page bears the date "Thursday, July 9, 1959" (click and drag the page to see it at the top). Deor (talk) 22:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Oops, thanks. HurricaneFan25 22:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

November 2

adding information on a persons history

TO WHO IT MAY CONCERNE,

HOW DO I GO ABOUT GIVING YOU INFORMATION TO BE ADDED ON A PARTICULAR PERSON THAT IS ON WIKIPEDIA REGARDIND A FAMOS MUSICIANS FAMILY TREE.

THANK YOU FOR ANY HELP.

ELLEN MULE' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellenkimby21 (talk • contribs) 02:50, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Before information can be added to a Wikipedia article, it needs to have been published elsewhere first in a reliable source. That is because, in order to be trustworthy, everything in Wikipedia needs to be verifiable. If the information you wish to add has been published in a book, magazine, journal, website, etc. and said source is reasonably accessible, then you may add it to an article, so long as you properly cite the source it came from. If you are adding this information solely from your own personal knowledge, or your own original research, and the information is not accessible elsewhere, Wikipedia cannot accept it. If you are having trouble with the technical aspects of adding the information, you can provide the sources on the article's talk page (click the "discussion" tab when viewing the article) so that someone with more experience may help. --Jayron32 03:02, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Red Star Belgrade tickets

Can someone please advise me on how to buy advance tickets for the home matches of Red Star Belgrade? The English version of their website is here but I don't see any information there on how to buy tickets (the 'Shop' section is just for merchandise). Thank you, --Viennese Waltz 08:43, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Maybe the embassy can advise you?

They are at: Embassy of Serbia and Montenegro in Austria, Address: Rennweg 3, A-1030 Wien, Phone: +43 1 713 25 95, 712 12 05. That is close to the Lower Belvedere, if you contact them in person. --Incognito.ergo.possum (talk) 10:37, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Red Star Belgrade's website has email contact details and the phone number to buy tickets[28] (probably they have an English or German speaker there) or you could email Belgrade tourist information[29]. Also check out the TripAdvisor forums, e.g.[30]. I gather that attendances aren't high, unless it's a local derby against Partizan, so it should be easy to get a ticket. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:00, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

How did this seller make a profit?

I recently purchased NBA 2k12 online from a site called "eCrater". It didn't look extremely reputable, but it was selling a brand new game for $40, free shipping, when all the other major online retailers were selling it for $60. I was a bit hesitant to buy from this source at first, but seeing as it had by far the best price on the net that I could find, and that the seller accepted Google Checkout and PayPal, I felt it was a safe enough purchase.

Abysmally slow shipping aside, I'm overall very happy with my purchase; the item was exactly as described, and I saved a cool $20. I'm confused as to how this seller is making any profit, though. The seller included an invoice with the game, and when the invoice stated that the seller had purchased the game from walmart.com and had it shipped directly from me: for $59.97!

How is the seller making money by charging my card $40 and buying the game for $60, then having it shipped to me? Is something fishy going on? If it helps, the return address for the shipper was Canadian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtzen (talk • contribs) 13:50, 2 November 2011 (UTC)