Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:00, 24 August 2010

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/M

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.

August 19

drugs

what is (if there is) the difference between methaphedmine and amphedmine? Is "ice" amphedime or methamphedimeKnowledge4k (talk) 11:54, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amphetamine and methamphetamine are closely related chemicals (the latter has a methyl group that the former does not). The effects of the two (compare amphetamine#Effects and methamphetamine#Effects) are pretty similar. When such substances are illicitly made, it's common for poor quality control to result in a batch actually containing a range of related compounds rather than the single desired one, rendering the already complex matter of how such a substance interacts with the body yet less predictable. Meth is commonly known as (among other things) "ice", although in Australia 4-Methylaminorex is also called "ice". -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 12:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

most powerful guns in the world

whatcha got? --Baysean (talk) 13:22, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Project HARP, Project Babylon -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 13:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Supergun in general. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 13:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Though if you mean, "something you could use at relatively small distances," miniguns are pretty impressive in terms of their rate of fire, and the GAU-8 Avenger is a pretty neat piece of machinery. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to beat nuclear artillery. You could even use a gun-type shell for extra credit. --Sean 15:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've always thought the nuclear rifle would fit under this title. ^Avic _ennasis @ 16:09, 9 Elul 5770 / 19 August 2010 (UTC)

"Gun" is a relative term here. Typically (I've got no cite to back this up) the distinction between "gun" and "cannon" is the .50 caliber mark. I might be wrong about that though. Shadowjams (talk) 06:10, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What - like this gun? Alansplodge (talk) 17:19, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does this qualify? Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 07:17, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Musical instruments

Whats the difference between a banjo and a ukelele?--88.104.80.177 (talk) 15:23, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two main differences are they way the strings are tuned and that the banjo has a head (rare among chordophones) and the ukulele doesn't. There are also great differences in sound, technique and most common appearance in musical genres. I suggest you read our articles on banjo and ukulele and listen to examples (in the articles or on youtube, for example). ---Sluzzelin talk 15:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might also find the Banjo ukulele article interesting. -- Q Chris (talk) 16:34, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the main difference, IMO, is that the first one is slightly less annoying.

--Ludwigs2 17:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The banjo-ukelele was popularized by British entertainer George Formby, Jr.. Other such hybrid instruments include a Mandolin-banjo, a Banjo guitar or Guitjo. All stummed/plucked stringed instruments (guitar/mandolin/banjo/uke) could be played roughly like each other, however historically they have different tunings and playing techniques. For example, there's nothing to stop someone from tuning a banjo to standard guitar tuning and strumming it like an acoustic guitar; its just not often done like that historically. --Jayron32 03:04, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misread, the first one would be banjo not ukulele so your statement doesn't make sense Nil Einne (talk) 13:12, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A banjo takes longer to burn! :-)--88.104.84.86 (talk) 07:19, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FFV Fuels that can be used on Flex vehicles

Hi,

I need to find out what percentage of the existing 9,000,000 FFV that are on the road today,can use all three: plain Gasoline, E85 and M85. Are the cars that Detroit is making today as they come from the showroom can use all three fuels. I had heard that FF vehicles that use E85 cannot use M85 and vice versa. Please advise.

Ignacio Aliaga <redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Consultiali (talk • contribs) 19:05, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does FFV, or any of the references therein, answer your question? (I removed your email address by the way) --ColinFine (talk) 21:51, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gasoline, E85 and M85 FFV

Can Flex fuel vehicles in today's showrooms and 9,000,000 vehicles in the country use all three fuels, gasoline. E85 and M85. I was told that vehicles like Ford and GM or any vehicle that was a FFV that use E85 cannot use M85 and vice versa. Please explain if all FFV in the USA made as FFV can use all 3 fuels without changing anything in the vehicle once it is manufactured.

Please advice —Preceding unsigned comment added by Consultiali (talk • contribs) 20:34, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To give your question some context for others, relevant articles are Flexible-fuel vehicle (FFV). E85, and the M85 disambig page says it's "a 85% Methanol / 15% Petrol blend." -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 21:44, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most modern cars could run on E85 - but they have problems getting the engine started using that fuel - especially in cold weather. In places like Brazil, where ethanol is commonly used, they install a small secondary gas tank which they fill with regular gasoline - the car uses that to start and get warm - then the driver flips a switch and drives the rest of the way on Ethanol. Older cars can't do that because ethanol dissolves rubber and some other compounds found in the gaskets, seals and hoses. Modern cars don't have that problem - but they do need special setup to start on ethanol - which is what a "flex fuel" vehicle brings to the game. Ethanol also conducts electricity (gasoline doesn't) so they have to be more careful with things like submerged fuel pumps.

M85 is a whole different problem. Methanol corrodes aluminium - so it is essential that the fuel not come in contact with any aluminium engine parts. Since aluminium is used for lightness in most engines these days, it takes a LOT to make a normal car run M85 for anything other than drag racing or other motor sports (where the engine can be torn apart after just a few minutes of operation - and you don't expect your car to last for 150,000 miles on the one engine!). Flex fuel vehicles are really no different in this regard.

SteveBaker (talk) 00:19, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may also find our Autogas article interesting as a different alternative to those fuels. Exxolon (talk) 01:07, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion forum

I'm looking for a discussion forum that focusses on issues around energy efficiency in the home and green remodeling / appliance choice. I can't find one though - can you? Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.120.194.187 (talk) 21:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Type "Green living forum" into Google.com and click on any of the first dozen or so links that come up. SteveBaker (talk) 00:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This and this seem to be decent forums. There must be hundreds around, but if you can't find any dedicated forums, why not post on a 'off-topic' or 'community discussion' section on an unrelated forum instead? I'm sure there's nothing wrong with that. Chevy monte carlo 07:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Illness and Injury

Should or shouldn't athletes complete or play though their illness/es or injury/ies? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mybodymyself (talk • contribs) 22:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That of course depends on a lot of things. What's the nature of the injury? How important is the game to the athlete? How likely is the injury to develop complications if it's played on? In many cases, "playing through" an injury will mean that it takes the injury longer to heal. This may be acceptable to the athlete if he feels that the benefits of not missing some games outweigh the costs of having an injury longer. Buddy431 (talk) 22:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And, of course, if this sports injury affects you or anyone you know, the injured person should ask their doctor/physiotherapist/athletic trainer. Such professionals will be able to give the best advice for the specific injury and the specific person, helping the athlete avoid ruining their career. 86.161.255.213 (talk) 22:51, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It also depends a lot on what the teacher of your sports medicine class taught you when you answer this homework problem. In general, they have probably spoken in class about the benefits and drawbacks of playing through injuries, and what sorts of injuries one should or should not play though. You should read through the notes your wrote down during lecture the day(s) he or she discussed these issues, and/or you should read the chapters of your textbook where these issues are discussed. --Jayron32 02:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--Jessica A Bruno 19:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Who should or shouldn't make the decision on whether an athlete can play though their illness or injury?--Jessica A Bruno 18:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mybodymyself (talk • contribs)

Assuming the athlete is an adult, it is up to him or her. If they speak with their doctor or trainer who tells them that if they try to play through the injury, they run a high risk of a much worse injury, then they have been advised and are responsible for any consequences that occur. Googlemeister (talk) 19:36, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all of your answers to my question here. All of them were informative. Anyway, I was only curious about this then student and etc along those lines.--Jessica A Bruno 19:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

August 20

Sending lots of photos over Internet

What's an effective way so send about 20 jpeg photos (~200mb in total) over to someone without using .rar or .zip? Acceptable (talk) 00:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dropbox? [1] Dismas|^(talk) 01:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Upload them to a site like photobucket and send your recipient a link to the album —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.167.165.2 (talk) 02:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At the risk of promoting one company over another, you might also consider sending the folder via a service like YouSendIt. It does have a number of no-charge options, and it does work rather well (from my own experience). --McDoobAU93 (talk) 03:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How good are you with computers? You could download Apache and serve the photos from your home computer. (An FTP server would probably be an even better choice; very easy to set up if you're running Linux). I wouldn't bother if you hardly send this many photos, but if you do this often or want to send the photos to multiple recipients, serving them yourself eliminates any middlemen, terms of service, and non-ISP bandwidth charges.--el Aprel (^facta-_facienda) 04:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some ISPs have in their terms of service that you are not to operate a server. I don't know that they'd really enforce that if you're just running ftpd (yikes! don't do that -- at least make it sshd) for a few friends to download stuff (assuming they even found out), but I also don't know that they wouldn't. --Trovatore (talk) 04:09, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt zipping them would help much, and at an average of 10 MB apiece, you might hit the upper bound on your e-mail. Do they have to be sent via internet? Certainly 200 MB will fit easily on a CD (or better yet, a little flash drive) and they could be snail-mailed. Also, if there's anything sensitive in those photos, you're better off not using the internet anyway. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:27, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about Flickr? If they have a 'private album' feature or something similar, you could upload it there and then send the person the link. You could use a 'private album' or a similar feature if you don't just want anybody to see the photos. Chevy monte carlo 06:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One important thing to note (which may help to cut off some avenues of discussion here) is that JPEG files are already compressed about as tightly as it is possible to compress image data. So if you're looking for a way to compress them further, you are wasting your time. Compressing JPEGs usually makes them bigger - not smaller! Hence, all programs like ZIP and RAR (and TAR and BZIP and GZIP...and many, many others) are going to do for you is to package all of those files into one big one. If the person you are sending them to is technologically unsophisticated and might not be able to unpack them - then you're basically going to have to send them individually. I agree though that for most people it's better to put the images onto some kind of web site so people can look at them super-easily - and only have to save them if they need to. SteveBaker (talk) 00:08, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually some specialised models can usually further compress JPEGs. StuffIt was the first, but it seems others notably WinZip have now developed their own. I can't find any tests with multiple files but these two [2] [3] show StuffIt achieved a compression ratio of 24%+ (0% means n compression i.e. compressed file is same size as uncompressed). (StuffIt still seems to be about the best, perhaps because they have patents, Some PAQ variants may be mildly better but these are generally more research then intended for normal usage, and I wonder if they actually violate the patents anyway.) This isn't that surprising since it's a rather old format. See also JPEG#Lossless further compression. I think this has been discussed before on the RD as well. Nil Einne (talk) 10:05, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hjsplit is a little free program that can split your files into smaller chunks that you can send as e-mail attachments. The recipient uses the same program to reconnect the files. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Making food with just a water boiler

I'd like something that can be stored in room temperature and is healthy so I can just buy a large quantity and not bother about it anymore. It won't be my only source of nutrition, no worries. --85.77.220.201 (talk) 11:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say Pot Noodles were healthy but they'd fit your bill! --TammyMoet (talk) 12:09, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dried soup mixes (particularly for legume-based soups) also qualify. Marco polo (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Couscous (the instant sort). Just add a spice or two. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:31, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about pasta and rice? Googlemeister (talk) 13:15, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mie Goreng is ultra cheap, rather tasty and really good with different sauces and spices.Jabberwalkee (talk) 13:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you are willing to do some work, and not use the water boiler but sunshine, then rather than buy the factory made crap then mipku is always good. Once you have that you could then go on to make Pemmican. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 14:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC) Missed a bit the first time. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 14:51, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cup a soup? Chevy monte carlo 16:04, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many types of meat, starches and vegetables, as well as fruit and milk are available in jars, cans or plastic retort pouches, and can be stored at room temperature. There is no reason to stick to dried instant meals or weird exotic foods. Crackers have a long shelf life as well. So does cereal, rice, and instant mashed potatoes. Peanut butter is an old favorite. Velveeta is a cheese product that does not need refrigeration. Edison (talk) 20:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nit picking: the article says "As is the case with most processed cheeses, the manufacturer recommends Velveeta be refrigerated after opening." 92.29.119.106 (talk) 22:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good information. One website claimed it did not, but it certainly makes sense to refrigerate it after opening, and I accept your statement that that is what the manufacturer m. I could not find any info relative to this on the Kraft homepage. One possibility would be to find some meal-sized packs, so that you only open what the family or individual can consume in a meal. Edison (talk) 04:36, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the suggestions that have been made are devastatingly high in dietary sodium. Unfortunately it seems to be extremely difficult to get convenient staple nutrition in a way that is even remotely within the sodium limits that are even borderline acceptable. The pasta and rice suggestions are not bad provide you don't add salt or salty sauces; similarly you could consider using oatmeal as a decent fraction of your daily calories (I like to get the steel-cut oatmeal, and add fresh or dried fruit to the boiling water before putting the oatmeal in).

But unfortunately there's no substitute for lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, and they have to be bought every two or three days. There is no healthy way to buy a lot and forget about it. --Trovatore (talk) 01:26, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of fresh fruit and vegetables, dried and frozen fruits and vegetables can provide a good alternative. Dried fruits can keep, if stored correctly, almost indefinately at room temperature. A properly maintained garden can provide a nearly year-round source of fresh vegetables in most climates, if the proper vegetables and fruits are planted at the right times. Excess fruits and vegetables can be canned and stored as preserves, and you don't need anything more than boiling water to sterilize the mason jars. People did manage to eat year round before the advent of prepared foods and microwaves. --Jayron32 05:30, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Energy bars meet your criteria with the added advantage of not requiring any additional preparation at all. There are many brands all with different nutritional profiles so read labels carefully. —D. Monack ^talk

Help in identifying a golf cart.

I know I've asked this before, but I've been searching Google for months regarding info on a certain Yamaha golf cart. It had no inbuilt roof, and had handlebars for steering instead of a typical wheel. I don't know the year or model, and my dad returned it to the dealer due to technical problems. Blake Gripling (talk) 12:20, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's YAMAHA TurfMate G6-A. See [4], [5], and [6]. Oda Mari (talk) 15:09, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Helping me find a sticker the size of an asterisk.

I am applying stickers to a scale model, and I just lost a shiny, circle-shaped modeling sticker that is only like, a millimeter in diameter. How am I supposed to find it in my carpeting without ruining or destroying it by accident? 64.75.158.198 (talk) 20:02, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try a lint roller. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 20:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Turn off the lights and try shining a bright flashlight over the area and see if you can pick up a reflection. Matt Deres (talk) 20:32, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Static electricity is your friend here. Googlemeister (talk) 20:55, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why do I see the number 22 or 2.2 on cars

I see a lot of cars with chrome numbers 22 or 2.2 added as aftermarket trim. Can anyone tell me what this means?23:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.66.7.18 (talk)

Numbers on the sides of cars, unless it's in some sort of race, normally indicate the engine displacement in liters. Although 2.2 is rather low to be proud of it... Dismas|^(talk) 01:51, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or, in these carbon-conscious days, rather high to be proud of it? (Enquires 1.2-driving 87.81.230.195 (talk) 08:50, 21 August 2010 (UTC))[reply]

2.2 being low is very culture dependent. American cars tend to have very high capacity engines - e.g a current standard Chevrolet Corvette has a 6.2 engine and 0-60 in 4.2 secs. On the other hand a current top spec Mitsubishi Evo manages 0-60 in 3.5 from a 2.0 engine. The capacity of an engine is a very unreliable measure of performance. Exxolon (talk) 23:19, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, these are people bragging about the size of their wheels, not engine. Which is rather silly.. they're hurting the safety and performance of their cars with these ridiculous wheels. I don't see where this is something to brag about. Friday (talk) 18:52, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If we're talking about everyday sort of cars the 2.2 would definitely be engine displacement. Sure it's not a huge engine, but when someone's choosing between a 1.8 litre and 2.2 litre engined car, the 2.2 litre will have noticably better performance (and the 1.8 litre noticably better fuel economy) --Psud (talk) 02:25, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 21

if a trade smeargle from Colosseum will it still have a red tale

if a trade smeargle from colosseum will it still have a red tale —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.23.212.162 (talk) 00:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't speak Markov chain. Marnanel (talk) 01:24, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably this is a Pokemon question? You would have better luck:

Asking on the Entertainment Desk
Slowing down to check your message, making sure you've written in full sentences and mentioned that you are talking about Pokemon.

The best I can offer you is the articles Pokemon Colosseum and smeargle. A quick skim of the article on Bulbapedia gives me no reason to think the colour of its tail will change. 86.161.255.213 (talk) 01:39, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Am I just getting old, or is pokeman a really, really strange concept? --Ludwigs2 02:25, 21 August 2010 (UTC) [reply]

It's just a wholesome children's game where you capture intelligent creatures and force them to beat each other into unconsciousness, no matter how non-violent they normally are. Who'd have a problem with that? 86.161.255.213 (talk) 12:08, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they're asking about something like this. After having played it for too long. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 02:38, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You know, if we do interpret the "red tale" as a communist story, it might even be possible that they're talking about an advanced game of Mao. But in that case we can't tell them the rules without taking a penalty. Marnanel (talk) 02:40, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Red tail indicates it's shiny. There's no reason to think a Pokemon would lose its shininess being traded from one game to another; certainly, they never do when traded among the regular handheld games. 90.195.179.233 (talk) 14:52, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me identify an Anchorage, Alaska building

Resolved

I took this picture in Anchorage when I was there in 2006. I would like to identify it, as well as know where it is. Any help in finding out would be greatly appreciated. It's apparently not one of the tallest buildings. — Athelwulf ^[T]/_[C] 04:06, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Identifying that peculiar little Prince-like logo would probably help. Meanwhile, have you looked for the building in Google Images? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:53, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr gives ASRC Building which I'm guessing is the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, hey presto - the logo's match too. It was on the 6th page of a search of Flickr for "anchorage building alaska". Nanonic (talk) 10:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And here it is on Google Maps. Nanonic (talk) 10:53, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks guys! I did look through Google Images, but I guess I wasn't using the right search terms or something. Just found pretty skylines and a couple pics of Sarah Palin. Again, thanks. — Athelwulf ^[T]/_[C] 10:29, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Manual strangling

Suppose you were a pathologist who needs to investigate a corpse. If it was murdered by manual strangling, what signs are there on the body? (I know, I've asked enough strange questions already...) Kayau Voting IS evil 04:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marks around the neck, I would presume? 24.189.87.160 (talk) 04:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try this page[7], which I got from googling post mortem signs of strangling There are many other hits. Richard Avery (talk) 07:03, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CSI usually mention facial petechiae Rojomoke (talk) 10:11, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From a forensic anthropology class I took many years ago, they told us that bruises around the neck and broken hyoid bone were common. The article linked to by Richard Avery seems to cover these and their deficiencies pretty well. --Mr.98 (talk) 15:55, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The lungs will also show distinct signs, if the death was from suffocation. Looie496 (talk) 00:48, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anecdotally, the teeth take on a pinkish tinge as the blood vessels inside them are ruptured from the pressure. Exxolon (talk) 23:11, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's the formula or algorithm used to calculate the banker's offer on Deal or No Deal?

Don't know if this belongs in Entertainment, Mathematics, or here. Thanks. 76.27.175.80 (talk) 17:09, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

His offer is often close to the median value, and always much less than the expectation (Arithmetic mean), but the banker plays psychological games with the contestant, so there is no algorithm. Dbfirs 17:21, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not certain, but "the banker" is in all likelihood a plot device. It is highly probable that the shadowy figure they show is in no way involved with determining the amount offered. Most gameshows which offer "jackpots" take out insurance against paying out the jackpot (and near-jackpots), in order to mitigate risk and smooth cash flows. In doing so, they have to provide the insurance company with information on the method of payout determination. In a game like Deal or No Deal, the likelihood of the contestant accepting the offer is critical to figuring the chance of a jackpot, so "we'll offer what we feel like" probably wouldn't cut it. I have no way of being certain, but I highly suspect that there *is* an algorithm used, possibly with a certain random factor included to avoid being obvious. I'd guess that most of the offers are determined solely by a computer, but with the producers "tweaking" it rarely when doing so would increase drama (e.g. play psychological games), although they're probably limited by certain guidelines (e.g. never go over the expectation value, never more than X% away from the computer estimate, etc.). If an algorithm does exist, though, it is probably protected by pretty severe confidentially agreements to avoid people "gaming" the system (like Michael Larson did on Press Your Luck when he figured out its algorithms), so even if we were sure there was an algorithm, we wouldn't know what it was. -- 174.21.233.249 (talk) 17:42, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found this from google. The author claims that his formula (based on data of 31 banker's offers in the US NBC version) explains "99% of the variance in the banker's offer". Although my understanding is that the banker takes account of the contestant's attitude to risk - so there is no formula. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 17:31, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the US version is different to the UK w.r.t. bankers, asI recall the UK version is much more context dependent. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 17:35, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These formulas just do not work, even for the American version, though there is some truth in the claim that the offer comes closer to the expected value as the number of remaining boxes decreases. In the English version, the "banker" tends towards the median in early rounds, but there is considerable variation to make the game more interesting. Dbfirs 22:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TV programs cost an absolute fortune to make and compared to that, the prize money is not the biggest cost. TV studios are much more likely to pick the amount to make the show more interesting - perhaps to skew the ratio of winners to losers to match some kind of predetermined amount that will keep people watching. SteveBaker (talk) 20:05, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The banker" once offered a contestant root beer. If there is a formula, I don't it's used every time. ~A H 1^(TCU) 19:57, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that the producers aren't concerned with the prize money. Game shows with giant top prizes, such as Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?, generally have insurance against having to pay out the big jackpot. In fact, the insurer for the US version of Millionaire? sued the show after someone won $1 million -- they said the questions were too easy! -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another jarring Americanism.

I listen to and watch several USA news channels and always find it jarring to hear a report such as, "The President and First Lady met with the leader of XYZ Thursday evening", or "A fire-engine broke down on the freeway Wednesday morning". Why not "last Thursday evening", or "on Wednesday morning"? And why, whenever that misuse began to develop away from the British English format, did the whole of the Continental USA unquestioningly follow suit, knowing as they must have done that it was wrong? 92.30.184.85 (talk) 18:33, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should ask this on the language desk if you don't just want anecdotes as answers, or smug replies about how English is a living language, etc. --Mr.98 (talk) 18:35, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Smug questions will probably get smug replies no matter where they are asked. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:03, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plus I don't see anything wrong with that construction. English is a living language, after all. 24.83.104.67 (talk) 19:18, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your whole premise is wrong. American English did not develop away from British English. Both modern American English and modern British English developed away from early modern British English. In many ways, modern American English is closer and more faithful to its early modern parent than modern British English is. So, in many cases, it is modern British English that has developed away from the earlier norm. Why should American English have followed British English on its errant path? Marco polo (talk) 20:06, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

an old linguistic factiod I heard somewhere, that Shakespeare (if he were alive today) would actually be most comfortable with the way that English is spoken in Chicago. --Ludwigs2 20:27, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More of an opinion than a fact(oid) I would venture. Alansplodge (talk) 23:40, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You've planted a mental picture of Richard Daley II doing Richard III: "Now is da winter of our discontent..." Right. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a problem with it, though I am American, so maybe I'm just used to it. I think it's better the way they do it than the way you suggest with the day of the week first. The media's way gets the heart of the story out there first and then notes the day. I care less about when something happened than I do about what happened. Dismas|^(talk) 00:11, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It may sound dysphonious to your ear, but there's nothing wrong with it. The Rhymesmith (talk) 01:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why has the USA changed its language? Surely you don't think England's version of English has remained unchanged since the 1700s? (If you do think so, perhaps a trip to the library is in order.) APL (talk) 03:42, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you can explain why band names in the singular are still considered plural in England... nah, not worth it. It's language; it doesn't make always sense. English has just too many exceptions to even bother figuring out such minor annoyances (if they are even that). Aaronite (talk) 04:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As with any group noun, we imply "the members of ....". Perfectly logical shorthand on this side of the pond. Language just keeps changing despite pedants who try to fossilize it. Dbfirs 06:16, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The context is clear that it's on the most recent day of the week specified. I don't see what the problem is. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, now I see the problem. The Brits have invented time travel and haven't bothered to tell us about it. So if they say David Cameron met with opposition leaders Thursday morning, they mean this coming Thursday. --Trovatore (talk) 07:11, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We would say "met with opposition leaders on Thursday morning" It's the lost preposition that sounds odd, but I'm only annoyed when Brits copy Yanks. Alansplodge (talk) 08:31, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent. Like if it's Friday and I say Thursday, I'm referring to yesterday. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:53, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Except if it's in the future: "XX will happen on Thursday" means the Thursday coming up. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how Alan's example was worded. "Will meet" obviously refers to the future. "Met with", as he stated, indicates the past. Unless the British announcers really talk that way. Let's hope not. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The British say things like "I shall be delighted to see you Tuesday next"; the ancestors of modern Britons and Americans said things like "washing clothes of a Monday" or "going to Church a-Sunday", as you'll find in nursery rhymes (e.g. "Solomon Grundy") and Shakespeare. But the preposition does make things smoother.—— Shakescene (talk) 07:42, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you're mistaken; I've never heard anyone use a construction like that. "Solomon Grundy" doesn't either - have a look at your own link. Alansplodge (talk) 08:36, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My own grandparents (who were indeed fairly ancient) said "of a Monday" or whatever day. I took it to be a slurring of "every Monday", but whatever. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I humbly point the OP to our informative and detailed article on the differences between British and American English, which should answer his query. CS Miller (talk) 15:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just one question—do they really say a fortnight in jolly old England? Bus stop (talk) 15:31, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - it's an everyday word and a jolly useful one too - you should try it. Alansplodge (talk) 15:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jolly interesting I find that. I think "fortnight" would make any American laugh if heard on this side of the ocean. (I hate the word pond.) Bus stop (talk) 21:11, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I use the word "fortnight" reasonably often here in Texas - some people don't know what it means - but so far, laughter has not ensued. SteveBaker (talk) 23:17, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't laugh at it, but I'm not sure what function it serves, given that two weeks is faster to say than a fortnight. OTOH fortnightly neatly solves the problem of whether biweekly means once every two weeks, or twice a week. --Trovatore (talk) 23:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I always make my decisions about vocabulary with a stopwatch in hand. Marnanel (talk) 23:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely no need to apologise for not using the word "pond" to refer to the Atlantic Ocean, Bus stop. After all, it is, in case it slipped anyone's notice, a fucking ocean, and not a pond. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 05:34, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apologizing for not using a colloquialism. Kind of like the time Groucho said, "Do you mind if I don't smoke?" However, I would argue that the Atlantic is just a really big, saltwater pond. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Argue that way till hell freezes over if you like, you still won't get anyone worth their salt to agree with you. Is Jupiter not a planet but just a really big marble? Is Africa not a continent but just a really big clod of dirt? I could go on. The Groucho reference escapes me completely. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 11:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Solomon Grundy,

Born Monday,

Christened Tuesday,

Married Wednesday,

Took ill Thursday,

Grew worse Friday,

Died Saturday,

Buried Sunday.

This is end Solomon Grundy.

ps. The number (of) defiant and inherently inferiority-complex defences above (of) American misusages (of) (News-Speak) English , convinces (the) OP that the responders (above) are aware (of), and embarrassed (by), the slavish misuse (of) (the) Mother-Tongue, such that they have decided (en-masse) (to) blatantly adhere (to) Fox News (and) CNN English (as) determined (by) feminist striped-suit-wearing (anchors), because it demonstrates (their) independence from the old and jolly UK; and also signifies the feminist view that "difference is better".92.30.153.213 (talk) 15:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Methinks the OP doth project too much. --- OtherDave (talk) 12:26, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While "last Thursday evening" is potentially redundant, it really should be "on Wednesday morning," at least in (what should be) the semi-formal language of a newscast, but as far as "jarring Americanisms" go it's odd that you'd choose those ones when there are egregious examples like "a couple three," as in "we're going away for a couple three days." Exploding Boy (talk) 02:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Average # of patents for an American patent holder

How many patents does the average person who holds at least one American patent have? Thanks. 76.27.175.80 (talk) 19:20, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there are good statistics out there for this, but it is an interesting question. Just as an informal, non-statistically significant, non-scientific test, I clicked on a little over 20 random patents issued in the last 20 years on Google Patents, then put the inventors names back into the search (throwing out those with generic names), and tallied the results. My average was an impressive 24.39, with a median of 12, which was a lot higher than I had thought it would be. The reason is that my sample ended up picking up about six inventors who worked for IBM or big medical companies or big electronics companies. These sectors churn out literally thousands of patent applications per year and they have whole teams often listed as inventors on them. One of my names (an IBM one) had his name listed on some 155 patents (but not usually as the sole inventor). It was not uncommon to find people who had between 40-90 patents.

Throwing out the high end, I still only found two inventors in my list with only 1 patent each. The rest ranged from 2-20. Anyway I was surprised by this, but I shouldn't have been — it's been pretty well documented (see David F. Noble's excellent America by Design, 1977) that since the late 19th century most patents in the US are held by major industrial concerns, not the "amateur tinkerer" that people think of when they hear the word "inventor." Even the "amateur tinkerer" probably has more than one patent, though. I suspect that patenting is one of those things that, if you do it, you probably do it a lot, and if you don't do it, you probably never do it. There are of course the occasional people who happen across an invention in their course of work and get it patented, but I suspect they are drowned out by the volume of people who are basically patenting things as a full time job. But this is just speculation, and my data is certainly not scientific. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:50, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That sampling method doesn't quite work, for a subtle but interesting reason. Because you selected your names from randomly selected patents in the first place you don't end up with randomly selected inventors. In fact you're more likely to pick inventors with greater than average numbers of patents, which pulls your numbers up. Consider the following (rather extreme!) scenario:

There are 10,000 amateur inventors with 1 patent, and 100 very productive inventors with 100 patents. We'll assume every patent has only one named inventor, for simplicity.
Therefore there are 20,000 patents shared by 10,100 inventors; the mean patents-per-inventor is about 1.98 while the median is 1 (this distribution is highly positively skewed)
Taking a truly random sample of inventors, we'd expect to get a mean of roughly 2 patents each (but with some sampling error as our sample won't be totally representative; since only about 1% of inventors were productive, we'd ideally need a sample of several hundred. A sample size of 100 has roughly 37% probability of only containing amateurs, and for a sample size of 200 the risk of such an error is still about 14%. With a big enough sample though, this risk can be reduced as far as is desired, and the sample made more likely to be better representative of the whole group.)
Now consider selecting our sample of inventors just by picking patents at random and looking at their inventor. There were 10,000 patents by amateur inventors and 10,000 patents by productive inventors, so each inventor we select has a roughly 50% chance of being productive. This means our sample will be most likely be fairly evenly split between the productive inventors (100 patents each) and amateurs with just one. We will therefore expect our sample mean to be about fifty patents per inventor!

But of course the real mean should be about two patents per inventor. The over-large estimate of the mean was a consequence of not having equal probability of selecting each element (i.e. inventor) in the sampling frame. If you can't change the sampling methodology, an alternative is to adapt the formula used to estimate the mean instead, to take account of the fact that the highly productive inventors will tend to be overrepresented. TheGrappler (talk) 03:47, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To adapt the formula, I seem to recall that you can use a weighted mean - instead of adding up the x (number of patents) for each inventor and dividing by the number of inventors in the sample, use a weighting w for each inventor, add up wx for all the inventors, then divide by the sum of the weights. You need to set the weight for each inventor to be w = 1/x i.e. 1/(their number of patents). This compensates for the fact that that the inventor was x-times more likely to be selected than an inventor with one patent. This has the curious result that "wx" is one for each inventor, so the sum of wx is just the number of inventors sampled, while the sum of the weights is the sum of the reciprocals of the numbers of patents. Dividing the number of inventors sampled by the sum of the reciprocals of their numbers of patents, gives you a more realistic estimate for the mean number of patents per inventor. TheGrappler (talk) 17:03, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To rephrase

I asked a question a few days ago and it may have been badly worded as I did not get the answer. Many countries were involved in WWII. If we only look at Britain and Germany, which of these two countries made the first military attack on the other, and how long was it before the other side retaliated. I know Germany ivaded Poland and this can be seen as an act of war. I only want to know about these two countries and their interaction, for this perticular instant. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.145.145 (talk) 22:10, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The only warlike act on 3rd Sep appears to have been the sinking of SS Athenia by U30, although this was unknown to the German Government and high command. "RAF aircraft drop 6 million leaflets on cities in northern Germany[8]". Two German merchant ships are seized in UK ports; one British ship seized in a German port. A number of RN submarines were bombed by the RAF[9]. The next day, 4th Sep "RAF Bomber Command go in against German warships in the Heligoland Bight with 29 Bristol Blenheim and Vickers Wellington bombers in a daylight raid. The Admiral Scheer is hit three times but the bombs do not explode. The cruiser Emden is damaged by wreckage of a shot-down Blenheim. Of the attacking aircraft, 7 are lost."[10] A famous friendly fire incident on 6th Sep was the Battle of Barking Creek. Alansplodge (talk) 23:36, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can't look at these two countries in isolation and claim that England started the war, as Hitler tried to do. I thought that was made abundantly clear last time this question came up. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the OP was looking for facts to prove the Great Dictator wrong. No problem with that. Alansplodge (talk) 13:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also look at Phoney War and Miracle of Dunkirk. ~A H 1^(TCU) 19:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The latter article is now known, more appropriately, as Dunkirk evacuation. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 05:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 22

Help! I have really good wine but no corkscrew

Yes, I know I could grab a screwdriver or thin knife or something and go to town, but I'd ruin the cork and probably break it up and get cork in the wine. I do have a corkscrew and I've spent half an hour looking for it. Anyone have some suggestions?--141.155.148.156 (talk) 01:26, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I answered it myself. http://www.wikihow.com/Open-a-Wine-Bottle-Without-a-Corkscrew --141.155.148.156 (talk) 01:35, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

W.C. Fields could have used that advice when he complained, "Whilst traveling through the Andes Mountains, we lost our corkscrew. Had to live on food and water for several days." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:11, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol! By the way, it was (is) delicious. Worked like a charm though it took many wacks with my shoe.--141.155.148.156 (talk) 05:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"I always keep a supply of stimulant handy in case I see a snake, which I also keep handy." WCF. Odd that Googling up that saying gets an ad from the Betty Ford Center. PhGustaf (talk) 05:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes. Apparently the good Ms. Ford was fond of reptiles, yes, indeed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:48, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes! I might use that technique for a really crappy bottle of wine - or for a white/rose wine - but for a good red, you'll mix up the sediment into the wine, which is a gargantuan "no-no"! SteveBaker (talk) 23:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know if the Resveratrol perhaps is found in the sediments? Bus stop (talk) 02:33, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The pounding (on the bottle, on a wall) trick to pushing a cork out of a bottle is right up there with the microwave oven as among the very worst things that can be done to a nice bottle of wine. OK, OK, I’ve had wines that couldn’t be hurt by anything because they were so bad, but frankly if you have a wine worth opening, and you don’t have a corkscrew, get one. Have a beer while you wait. DOR (HK) (talk) 08:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you considered sabrage? --Trovatore (talk) 08:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or, slightly more conveniently, invest in one of these. CS Miller (talk) 22:04, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sabrage only works on sparkling wines where the mushroom-shaped cork sticks up out of the top of the bottle. Getting the cork out of your bottle of 1945 Chateau Mouton-Rothschild with a sabre is NOT recommended. (Although, at $116,000 a bottle, removing the cork by any means whatever is fiscally irresponsible!) SteveBaker (talk) 23:11, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or you could just pop down to the closest shop and buy a new corkscrew. Exploding Boy (talk) 23:11, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DeSales-Oblates

There is a page for Oblates of Saint Francis DeSales (OSFS); they are not included on the list of Roman Catholic Religious Orders page, however. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.169.37 (talk) 01:57, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have no page called List of Roman Catholic Religious Orders. If you mean Category:Roman Catholic orders and societies, the OSFS are in a sub-subcategory of that category, Category:Salesian Order. There's no need to list something in a category and all its parent categories as well; the more general categories would become huge and unusable. Marnanel (talk) 02:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Buying stuff online

I'm not allowed to buy stuff online, but there are several users on a website I frequent who are four or five years younger than me, and they are allowed to. Why do they have permission? jc iindyysgvxc (my contributions) 04:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who is not permitting you to buy? How do you know how old the other users are? Are they lying in their account settings? How old are you? What site are you using? Aaronite (talk) 04:50, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because their parents have a different parenting style? As you go through life you'll see that comparing everything to what others have and can do compared to you is a dead end that only leads to negative things.--141.155.148.156 (talk) 04:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If only the underprivileged would just be quiet about it! They'd be so much happier, and wouldn't have negative things, like emancipation. 213.122.34.174 (talk) 01:35, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many websites will ask you your age and not let you participate if you're under some particular age. Those age checks are mostly on the honor system, so if that's what's stopping you, your friends are probably just lieing about their age. APL (talk) 06:05, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From your user page I see you are a 17-year old boy. I guess you have parent(s) or guardian who cares for your safety on the Internet. Not all are so lucky as you. Be a little patient with the rules you are given because it won't be long before you become an adult. Then you will have all the responsibilities that implies, such as earning your keep. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:30, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One of the things that will stop you from buying things online is access to an appropriate form of payment. At 17, you're too young in most countries to have your own credit card (instead of one co-managed by your parents). The younger people who are buying online will likely be using their parents' online-financing, their parents have opened one for them (which may or may not be monitored by the parents) or some form of age deception has taken place. One of the primary solutions available to you is to have your parents assist you buying things online, or make friends with someone who will let you use their details in exchange for immediate payment (I have done this for people before, with their parents' permission). Steewi (talk) 02:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

future of retail industry in india

what is the future of retail industry in India?Pras9874 (talk) 07:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, Wikipedia is not a Crystal Ball; we cannot answer those types of questions. Chevy monte carlo 07:57, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The most we can say, to quote Curt Gowdy, is that "their future is ahead of them." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:16, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is hard to predict anything right now, but as far as I know, unlike China, India's organized retail industry is still in a nascent stage. For example, 100% FDI is still not allowed in India. There are so many Wal Mart stores in China, in India it is still unimaginable. And the future is certainly not bright if organizations like this exist. --Galactic Traveller (talk) 14:10, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article may help you. --Galactic Traveller (talk) 14:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Galactic Traveller, how much extra are you willing to pay to avoid shopping at Wal-Mart? Studies have shown that the typical US family that shops at Wal-Mart (with which I have no affiliation; there isn't even one in my city) saves about $600 a year. So, how much would you be willing to pay? DOR (HK) (talk) 08:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I call ^{[citation needed]} on DOR's US$600 per year claim. (Compared to shopping where? Nordstrom?) Also, of course, since Wal-Mart pays poverty-level wages[11] to its employees, the family you cite does pay some extra amount of money in taxes for things like Medicaid (2% of Wal-Mart employees are so poor they qualify) and other poverty-targeted local, state, and federal programs. I'm not asserting anything about the relative costs of the latter vs. the alleged savings. Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Statement on Global Warming (cont.)

I am continuing from my last question.

I am now not asking about Bjørn Lomborg, Penn Jillette, Teller, or any other particular person on these two particular statements.

What do global warming skeptics think about these two particular statements? How do they react and respond to these two particular statements? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.24.186 (talk) 10:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As for why so many people still resist what the facts clearly show, I think, in part, the reason is that the truth about the climate crisis is an inconvenient one that means we are going to have to change the way we live our lives...The truth about the climate crisis is an inconvenient one that means we are going to have to change the way we live our lives.-Al Gore

Lord Monckton has argued that these changes would make the rich richer, and the poor poorer while doing little to reduce the effects of anthropogenic global warming. He also states that the inconvenience of this change will be be carried by those who can least afford it.Smallman12q (talk) 14:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's kind of tedious to ask variations on the same, really specific question. Plug the sentence in particular into Google Blog search and you get tons of people commenting on that specific phrase, mainly people objecting to it. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I asked variations on the same specific question because they said they didn't know the answers to the earlier variations so I asked different variations of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.84.12.113 (talk) 08:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

why "life boy" still hold the market share in India at the semi urban and the rural area?

The life boy one of the oldest FMCG products in India still holds the market share in India specialy in the rural and the sei urbar area. But if the rule of product life cycle does not go with the product.Life boy also not change their product line, then how it's carry the market share. Pras9874 (talk) 14:39, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to Lifebuoy (soap) and Fast moving consumer goods? Bus stop (talk) 17:28, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

customer acceptance of a product(give necessary correction )

reformatted - Rojomoke (talk) 16:02, 22 August 2010 (UTC) [reply]
Dish washer took 21 years for customer acceptance, while Electric bulb take 3 years for the similar acceptance? my answer is as follows...

As the use of electric bulb is more than the dishwasher, and in every where the electric bulb is used ; at the same time dish washer can not used by every family. the dish washer is very much costly than a electric bulb. so dish washer take a long time for customer acceptance than electric bulb.

I try to answer this case, please give me necessary points, and can suggest me any article. Pras9874 (talk) 14:51, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Technology acceptance model and the See alsos in that article. Not very user friendly, but it is what you want, I think. I would add as an aside that a dishwasher is generally a luxury. I don't have or need one, but it would be nice to have one, it isn't as urgent for me to get one. Electric light, on the other hand, is very handy and used all the time. Aaronite (talk) 16:30, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It only takes a moment for a customer to evaluate the usefulness of a lightbulb. The calculation concerning cost and benefit is simple for the lightbulb. But in the case of the dishwasher the costs and the benefits are less clear or less immediately apparent. Bus stop (talk) 17:24, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not least because the dishwasher (according to QI) was not invented to wash dishes quickly, nor easily, nor cheaply. So the benefits for most households were merely sideeffects.- Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 19:39, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many households hand wash their dishes instead of using a dishwasher. There are also different kinds of lightbulbs, as incandescent lightbulbs are being phased out in some areas and replaced with compact fluorescent lightbulbs. ~A H 1^(TCU) 19:51, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That has nothing to do with how long it took for customer acceptance of the electric bulb. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:04, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's of note that electric light is only cheap and easy if the infrastructure is in place to use it. Edison is often remarked (by historians like Thomas P. Hughes) as being as important as a system builder as he was an inventor. Additionally when you compare electric lighting to its predecessors (e.g. gas lighting or oil lamps), the advantages of electric are pretty clear, and there are basically no disadvantages (once you have the infrastructure built up). --Mr.98 (talk) 20:04, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In reading into the OP's question I see an inquiry into how a dishwasher differs from an electric light bulb when first introduced to customers. (I can't suggest an article as requested.) But I think the most significant difference would have to be the obviousness of the usefulness of the light bulb — it turns night into day. Perhaps the OP can provide some feedback as to how well the question is being responded to so far. Bus stop (talk) 20:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of appliances are slow to catch on, especially as the initial unit cost tends to be fairly high. I can recall when DVD players were like a thousand dollars. I got my first one when they had come down to about 250. By now you can get a decent player for well under 100. Never mind the dishwasher, what about the automobile? It didn't catch on right away either, but as the prices came down and the convenience of driving went up, sales skyrocketed. Back to dishwashers, I can recall when they made "portable" dishwashers that were on wheels and could have their hoses attached to the tap. When not in use, you could roll it back into its corner and use it for an end-table. The big selling point on dishwashers would have to be not just convenience, but also sanitation. It can get the water much hotter than you can tolerate when washing dishes the manual way. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:46, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can marble interact unfavorably with brick?

I live in souuthwest Va and have a unique situation. My home has a brick chimney that has been sealed with marble plates on top. I also have an area on ground level that is topped with marble and brick lain beneath. The chimney is deteriorating mainly on the east side. It appears that rainwater running down from the marble slabs could be causing it. The weather comed mainly from the western direction and therefore the western side of the chimney is the least affected, maybe from the constant rinsing. The area on grund level is showing a white substance on the face of the brick.. The brick on both areas are peelig (flaking) off in approximately 1/100 of an inch and can be as large as the whole brick face. There are other homes in the area but none show this condition, none are topped by marble slabs either.

C Corvin 8/22/10 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.7.129 (talk) 20:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please note, totally non-expert response here, but if it was my chimney I would agree with you, and be suspicious of the marble. A Google search confirms that marble is particularly susceptible to weathering by rain - for example, see Acid_rain#Other adverse effects. The calcite in the marble will dissolve in the rain, damaging and weathering the marble itself. The dissolved calcite will raise the pH of the the rainwater trickling down onto the bricks. The white substance on the ground level bricks may well be deposits of calcite leached out of the marble chimney top and redeposited where the water pools at ground level. I have no idea what effect (if any) the resulting water will have on the bricks themselves; I suppose it will depend on the pH of the water. Googling suggests there are various grades of brick, and chimneys should be constructed from the most weathering-resistant. But in the absence of any other factor, and the lack of damage to the chimneys of neighbours without marble-topped chimneys, I would be inclined to look closely at the marble topping to my chimney stack. If it looks at all weathered or eaten away, I would be suspicious. Ka renjc 22:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is efflorescence. It is more likely that the damage is being caused by the mortar itself - it can contain salts and calcium substances that can expand in the brick and cause the brick to fail as you describe. The marble might not be helping, but I would expect that it would contribute only surface schmutz unless it itself is cracked. The way to defend against efflorescence and water-related damage is to ensure that the cap is properly sealed, and that the marble cap is secure, uncracked and is not admitting water in to the chimney. Water is the enemy - if the masonry is dry, the efflorescence can't be activated, and freeze-thaw cycles (which can be vicious in a chimney) don't have so much opportunity to break up the masonry. Acroterion _(talk) 03:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may be able to brush the efflorescence away with a stiff brush. 92.28.246.109 (talk) 21:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1973—2010 NYS license plates

can 1973 nys licence plates be reused on a motor vehicle today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.5.103 (talk) 21:21, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No. You have to pay a fee and get a current license. Some states allow "antique" vehicles, not driven in common use, but driven in 4th of July parades and such, to carry vintage or antique plates, but 1973 does not seem old enough. (Not legal advice, just common sense.)Edison (talk) 23:43, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The limit for 'antique' vehicles is 25 years...so '73 is OK. My '63 Mini has original British license plates that are legal for driving to and from club meetings, car shows, etc. I have clip-on modern plates for other uses. SteveBaker (talk) 23:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, a plate that isn't currently registered will have to be replaced with a new one that is. A more interesting question is could someone have renewed the same plate since 1973? I doubt it. I can't find a source that says so for sure, but thisdocument suggests that the oldest plates you're allowed to keep using are the blue and white plates issued in 2001. APL (talk) 14:44, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Legalization of Marijuana and the effects on the drug war

I was pondering what the legalization of marijuana would do to this country and I just read an article about four men who were hung dead by their feet in the middle of a Mexican city. Obviously there is a big market for drugs in the U.S., if there wasn't the drug cartel would not be so violent and destructive. My question is what do you think the legalization of marijuana in the U.S. would do to the United States/Mexican drug war. Would it calm the war down, or enrage it? Out of all the drugs smuggled across the borders, is marijuana one of the biggest profits for the drug cartel?

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.7.5.27 (talk) 22:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look at our article on Prohibition - that show's exactly what can happen when you outlaw an intoxicant and the results of repealing that law. Exxolon (talk) 23:07, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it were legalized in the US, it's not necessarily true that the importation of the stuff would become legal. SteveBaker (talk) 23:44, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but if it was manufacturable in the US, it would drop the price (at least for production, not necessarily for consumers) and thus the benefit of an illegal import business. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly where it's been quasi-legalized in California, there is heavy regulation of growers and sellers alike - that would likely be the model adopted throughout the country if there was legalization - precisely because there would be no desire to further increase the profits of cartels in Mexico. SteveBaker (talk) 23:03, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of discussion on this in many mainstream periodicals. Here, for example, is a recent Newsweek article on just this question. The general consensus seems to be that it would probably have some impact on the cartels. The cartels, of course, do not do all of their business in marijuana, and are powerful and diversified enough to probably continue on with some force afterwards. (Similarly, ending prohibition in the US in the 1930s did not destroy the mafia.) --Mr.98 (talk) 00:14, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "dirty little secret" about Prohibition is that it was significantly successful in its aim, as most people were inclined to obey the law. A major reason for the amendment was to curb spousal abuse by drunken husbands, which was practically an epidemic by the start of the 20th century. The ones not willing to obey the law obviously helped fuel the growth of organized crime, although as 98 notes, organized crime continued to flourish after Prohibition's repeal, and in fact it existed before Prohibition. Prohibition simply created a new market for the underworld to expand into. The other side of the Prohibition lesson is that legalizing currently-illegal drugs would theoretically lower their cost, which would theoretically have at least two effects: (1) a reduction in drug-related violent crimes; and (2) an increase in drug usage. This is not exactly a new debate. It came up in an Econ 101 class I was in a generation or two ago. Another question to ponder is this: Is America in better shape now, in regard to alcoholism and substance abuse in general, than it was in 1930? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:56, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I note that none of these responses have actually addressed the question. My impression is that cocaine is the big profitmaker and marijuana is relatively minor (as far as cross-Mexican-border smuggling is concerned), but I don't actually know any stats. Looie496 (talk) 03:17, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alcohol is more harmful than marijuana. Thus according the same status to marijuana as to alcohol would have the effect of alleviating hypocrisy. <-- personal opinion Bus stop (talk) 04:28, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marijuana is like soda pop compared with coke and heroin and such. Plus there's probably so much of it around that the cost is driven down. As far as harmfulness, I'm not so sure we even know all the long-range effects of marijuana. Those of alcohol are certainly well-documented, and most of them are not good. The dilemma with this entire substance abuse problem is that banning something doesn't directly address the real problem - namely, that many people are vulnerable to addiction of one kind or another. It's like a hard-wired human trait, with no clear explanation of where it would come from, evolutionarily speaking. I'm not convinced there's any net social benefit to legalizing this stuff, yet the libertarian in me keeps going back to what Drew Carey once said: "I don't think the government has the right to limit the ways I can hurt myself." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:38, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Except that its often not only yourself that is being hurt (c.f. drunk driving accidents). There are also societal harms (overall loss of productivity, health effects we all pay for via insurance premiums, psychosocial effects on one's family and friends, etc. etc.) I am inclined to agree wholeheartedly with arguements towards legalization, but the "its only me I am hurting" is a bad one. One can be both anti-drug and pro-legalization; there is also the (rather stronger, IMHO) arguement that criminalization actually worsens the drug problem because it prevents proper treatment af drug-related issues. --Jayron32 05:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's the fallacy in the "victimless crime" argument. No one is an island. What we do affects others, and while we might think we have the right to do whatever we want, they also have the right not to be impacted by what we do. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:51, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, the argument from self-ownership is the best one, and actually the sufficient one by itself. None of the "societal harms" follow necessarily from the use of the substance, and some of them (like the one about productivity) are about things that society is not entitled to demand of the individual anyway. --Trovatore (talk) 06:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That last comment opens a real can of worms. The bottom line on it is, is someone going to be productive, or are they going to be a sponge? "Society" is us, and society does, in fact, have the right to expect individuals to contribute and not to just be schnorrers. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:48, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying anyone has to provide for you in any way if you make that choice. I'm saying that they don't have the right to expect you to be productive. That might mean you starve, but it shouldn't mean the law has any claim against you. --Trovatore (talk) 06:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There was an interesting NYT article[12] recently about legal pot in Holland attracting criminal activity around "drug tourism". Result is Dutch towns near Holland's borders with other countries want to limit pot sales to Dutch citizens, but EU free-trade laws prohibit such discrimination. I've also heard claims that pot is a high-dollar export crop for California, so legalizing it (which will drive prices lower) may adversely impact the California economy. 67.122.209.167 (talk) 07:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An economist would have to run the numbers, BUT a few possible considerations: 1. whether the economic growth supported by a black market product is economically for the best (Cocaine Cowboys, an interesting if at times annoying documentary about the Miami coke boom in the 70s-80s, is an interesting point of comparison here — Miami did very well in the 1970s in part because of the hugh profits in cocaine, but the overall cost was quite high); 2. whether the losses would be made up by taxation; 3. whether the losses would be made up through savings in law enforcement (consider the costs to the state and economy of detecting, prosecuting, and imprisoning violators). The Holland situation is an interesting but special case, one about an arbitrage situation, basically, and one probably peculiar to Europe as well (where having one country with vastly different laws just a car or train or short shuttle plane away from other countries does encourage jurisdictional shopping — the US probably would have less of that, given that getting to it from any country other than Canada is still fairly non-trivial). In any case, I think the overall point — that there are costs and benefits to any policy decision — is worth taking seriously, and one should not believe the "for" hype or the "against" hype completely. It seems that on the balance, though, legalization would solve a number of social problems rather immediately which seem to be artifacts of the enforcement rather than the use. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We need more intoxication in America. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would gladly exchange higher rates of intoxication for lower rates of incarceration. The social and economic effects of the latter concern me far greater than the former. It is further debatable whether or not legalization would actually increase the rate of intoxication appreciably (it would probably change the method for many, but I doubt the rate). It would also gladly exchange the particular type of intoxication one gets with alcohol for the kind that one gets with marijuana, as a social issue. Though I don't (through personal experience) buy the "stoners are all peaceful" argument, I have found that the drunks I have met were far more unpredictable and often socially unpleasant than the stoned people I have met. --Mr.98 (talk) 17:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying alcohol consumption did not increase when Prohibition ended? I seriously doubt it. Surprisingly, a lot of people are law-abiding citizens, and once something previously forbidden is made available, more folks are going to try it - and like it. I could go off on a John Birch-style rant here, but I'll leave it be. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between arguing about alcohol use after Prohibition and all intoxicant use after legalization is that you already have people getting intoxicated legally at the moment. Going from "nothing is legal" to "alcohol is legal" is a different shift than going from "alcohol is legal, pot is illegal" to "both alcohol and pot are legal." Presumably the sorts of people who are prone to getting intoxicated are already doing it with alcohol. What I'm arguing is that the total number of people getting intoxicated probably would not change by legalizing pot, but that the means by which they get intoxicated probably would (you'd see a greater share of pot smokers rather than boozers). I think the sorts of people who never get intoxicated are not going to start with marijuana. That's just a presumption on my part, though. I know plenty of people who have never gotten stoned, but almost all drink wine or beer or harder on a pretty regular basis. I don't know anyone who has only smoked pot and never drank. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking personally here, while I have drunk before, I don't drink. I don't have anything particular against drinking except that I don't find I enjoy the taste of alcohol so I see little point spending a lot of money on something I don't enjoy. Sometimes, particularly when it's free, I may do it for fun, and once I did semi try to get drunk on RTDs but I don't know if I've ever really been drunk (I've never noticed anything). I've never smoken marijuana but if it were legal and easily available, I probably would have. If I found the experience enjoyable it may very well be something I did more regularly then drinking. While I'm probably not the common in NZ, I doubt I'm the only one. Also I suspect there are a fair few Rastafarians who use marijuana but limit their consumption of alcohol, given that one is generally semi-encouraged and the other one is semi-discouraged. Of course most of these are probably already consuming marijuana so their numbers may not change much. I can't help wondering whether there may be some others, e.g. Muslims or Jewish people who have religious reasons for refraining from alcohol but may decide marijuana is okay (at least a lesser sin enough). Notably tobacco often seems more accepted although there are perhaps increasing efforts to discourage it too. Nil Einne (talk) 05:41, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Judaism per se has nothing against alcohol (again per se). "A feast is made for laughter, and wine maketh merry" (Ecclesiastes 10:19). There are strict laws about how wine must be prepared to make it kosher, which you would hardly expect if it were considered sinful in itself. --Trovatore (talk) 09:45, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 23

what was this 3 wheeled vehicle?

I just saw a three-wheeled vehicle go past me in cambridge massachusetts. It had two wheels in the front and one in the back, was electric and it had an almond shaped wind screen in front. Does anyone know what it might have been? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.125.207.188 (talk) 12:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Myers Motors NmG (formerly called a Corbin Sparrow), perhaps? If not, try looking through Category:Three-wheeled motor vehicles. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 12:49, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very likely an experimental vehicle built by someone at MIT. Marco polo (talk) 12:51, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you need NHTSA certification to drive any vehicle on a public road in any US state? Experimental vehicles driving down a regular highway lane sounds illegal and unwise. Experimental vehicles normally run on racetracks or other private roads. Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the article Tricycle, it refers to 2 wheels in front as a "recumbent tadpole" design. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:52, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, I couldn't find it in the category, so maybe it was an MIT design, although it looked like a professionally manufactured vehicle. Either way, looking through Category:Three-wheeled motor vehicles was one of the most enjoyable twenty minutes of my week so far. Damn there are some silly-looking cars out there.

The Can Am Spyder is popular these days- could have been that. I'm aware of no production electric version, though. Friday (talk) 18:56, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gilford Michigan Tuscola County

It states in Wikipedia that the above mentioned town was named after the Gilford Family. Can you tell me where this information was obtained. I am trying to research Giford and would appreciate that information. As early as 1849 there are land entries for the town of Gilford. Thank you. Ref: History of Tuscola County —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bettyboop8001 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reference for the information was given in the Gilford Township, Michigan article as ^ Romig, Walter (1986) [1973]. Michigan Place Names. Detroit, Michigan: Wayne State University Press. ISBN 0-8143-1838-X. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And here is a link from Google Books. — jwillbur 20:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wooden Spoons in Pubs?

According to the BBC, one of the top ten jokes at the Edinburgh Fringe Fest was: "Wooden spoons are great. You can either use them to prepare food. Or, if you can't be bothered with that, just write a number on one and walk into a pub..." I'm from the US and don't know much about pub culture, so I assume the humor here lies in some special significance of wooden spoons with numbers on them -- could someone enlighten me? 96.246.59.38 (talk) 15:40, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are often used to indicate the number for food orders taken at the bar - so, if your food order is no. 8, you take the no.8 spoon and hand it back when the food is delivered to the table. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's exactly what it is. Chevy monte carlo - alt 16:46, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered about that joke as well and I'm from the UK. I've never been in a bar and had to take a spoon for my food order. Is it restricted to particular areas of the UK or have I just not had enough bar meals? Mike 87.113.180.73 (talk) 21:01, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The latter. They're also used in some pubs as ornamental table numbers, and hence stay on the table rather than being issued as a token by the bar staff. Despite all of that, the joke's still rather weak. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:10, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This search brings up a lot of examples. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Including this image. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remarkably, the woman wearing black seems to be holding a rare example of an invisible wooden spoon. --Dweller (talk) 10:15, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Confutation of Tyndale's Answer

I am looking for this work by Thomas More- is it available online anywhere? 149.169.162.134 (talk) 17:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is an excerpt of it on Google books HERE - but I can't find a complete version online. The most obvious place to look (Project Gutenberg - http://www.gutenberg.org) has a bunch of works by More - but not this one. SteveBaker (talk) 22:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, the Internet Archive - http://www.archive.org - is generally the most obvious place to look for downloadable books. They have all of PG's stuff as well as most/all of the PD google books, plus some other stuff. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:37, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum depth of Lake Havasu

Can anyone find a reliable source as to the maximum depth of Lake Havasu? The current number on the article (over 3,000 feet) is unsourced and seems way too deep; I haven't been able to find anything else about it on other sites. AlexiusHoratius 18:49, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's the product of a dam on the Colorado River, it can't be any greater than the maximum pool impounded by the dam. That maximum height is 450 ft ASL, and the dam itself is mentioned as about 85 feet high (much of the dam is below the riverbed). I haven't found a place where it all comes together, but here's the Bureau of Reclamation site: [13]. Acroterion _(talk) 19:10, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I found an 1883 (in other words, pre-Parker Dam) map of Arizona on Commons, and it mentions no lake of any kind at that location (since the dam is only a few hundred feet high, there would have had to have been a really deep natural lake there before). I think I'll just remove the figure for now, and let someone add a new one back in if a source can be found. AlexiusHoratius 19:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's the right action. In support, I note that Crater Lake is not that deep and its article says it's the deepest lake wholly within the US. --Anonymous, 19:40 UTC, August 23, 2010.

That bogus figure was posted by an IP last September 10th.[14] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - I agree. The original text (pre-vandalism) said that the average depth is 35 feet - which is much more believable. SteveBaker (talk) 22:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something wrong with my car brakes?

I just bought a new Toyota Yaris (50 miles) and I noticed that the brakes don't work as I expect them to. The brakes work as if there is reduced friction between the brake pads and the wheels. I have to press really hard to stop on red lights and I can't stop the car immediately (it keeps rolling for some distance). Also when the car is stopped I get tired from having to press down on the brakes to keep the car from moving. What type brake problems can a new car have that cause this problem. 76.84.122.32 (talk)UberYarisHaxor —Preceding undated comment added 23:50, 23 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]

The brakes may just need bedding in - see the end of this, for example, although your description sounds a little more extreme than this. There's much more discussion on the subject of bedding in brakes such as this--Tagishsimon (talk) 23:56, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you don't have enough fluid I imagine it could cause this. But don't ask random strangers on the internet- get that car back to the dealer and have them look at it. What you're describing sounds unsafe to me. Friday (talk) 23:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to the mechanic. That said, every car "feels" different. Aaronite (talk) 01:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you first start depressing the brake pedal does it seem soft and spongy? Then, do you find you have to press it further towards the floor than you have been previously used to in other cars? If so, then you have 'air' in the hydraulic system. The dealership will just have to bleed the bleedin' brakes for you. In a new car this is probably due to sloppy filling of the brake system with hydraulic fluid. Air is a lot more compressible than oil, so you loose hydraulic advantage.--Aspro (talk) 15:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 24

Australian politics

Julia Gillard was said to have won the "two party preferred" vote: What does this mean?Milwhee (talk) 06:07, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article on it, but in my opinion it is explained rather more clearly here.--Rallette (talk) 07:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should also be noted that Julia Gillard did not really win the two-party preferred. What it is effectively saying is that, after preferences, Labor party members (who would support a government formed by Julia Gillard) attracted more votes than Liberal party members across all electorates for the lower house. 124.171.201.251 (talk) 08:37, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The OP's terminology is understandable, given the way Australian elections have become presidentialised of recent years. The media's focus is overwhelmingly on the party leaders, as if every voter in Australia personally casts a vote for these people. That's not how it works in a Westminster parliamentary system. But you'd never know it to hear people talk about how they were going to vote: it was all about Gillard this vs. Abbott that, not about Labor's policies vs. the Coalition's polices. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 11:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

German 1910 Census

I wish to locate the census for the Memel area (Klaipeda)which I understand was carried out as part of the German Empire in 1910. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.108.94.3 (talk) 08:09, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your task is not an easy one. These numbers exist, but not online. The main problem is that the Memel area was not defined as such in 1910. It was not separated from the German Empire until after World War I. Before the Treaty of Versailles defined this region in 1920, it was part of the Province of East Prussia in the Kingdom of Prussia. It is possible to find the population of East Prussia as a whole in 1910 online, but not of the region that later became the Memel area. Within East Prussia, the region that later became the Memel area lay within four different Landkreise (counties or districts): Memel, Heydeburg, Tilsit, and Ragnit. I have not been able to find the populations of these Landkreise in 1910 online, but even if I could, this would not solve your problem, because only parts of the Heydeburg, Tilsit, and Ragnit Landkreise later became part of the Memel area. Parts of these three Landkreise remained within East Prussia and Germany after 1920, until 1945. (I believe that all of the Memel Landkreis became part of the Memel area in 1920.) So, even if you could find numbers for the four Landkreise I've listed, you'd have the population for a larger area than was later included in the Memel area. So, you'd have to research exactly which communes or municipalities were later made part of the Memel area. I am guessing that around 100 municipalities (mostly small villages) were involved. Then you'd have to locate archived records of the Statistisches Reichsamt, which performed the census. I believe that these records are housed in the Bundesarchiv Berlin-Lichterfelde in Berlin. Good luck. Marco polo (talk) 14:32, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, I see that your IP address geolocates to London. You might check with local research libraries, such as the British Library or the library of the London School of Economics, to see whether they have those census records. Some web searching suggested that German census records might also be housed at the Bodleian Library, though of course you'd want to confirm that with a librarian before setting out for Oxford. Marco polo (talk) 14:45, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plumbing - wc

there is a standing pipe next to a loo having a filter on top. maybe 2.5 feet high. what does it do? what is it called? how does it work? Maybe it is a pressure relief valve. Maybe an air admittance valve. My problem is that when the upstairs loo is used, the shower tray below emits smells, suggesting air or water are somehow pulled out. What should I do? Kittybrewster ☎ 10:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If I had this problem I would ring a plumber (one a friend has recommended) and ask for an opinion. It sounds as though the toilet pipe and the shower drain pipe are not connected properly. Maybe there is a vent needed and/or the shower needs a drain trap. Richard Avery (talk) 13:25, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on drain-waste-vent system says "Excessive negative air pressure, behind a 'slug' of water that is draining, can siphon water from trap seals at plumbing fixtures. ... An empty trap can allow noxious sewer gasses to enter a building". If the "standing pipe" is vertical and quite wide, with some form of cap on top, then it may be a vent mechanism and it may have become stuck in the closed position. This could then cause a siphoning of water from the trap in the shower drain downstream, and explain the smells. If so, running the shower for a short time should replenish the water in its drain trap and reduce the smell. But, as Richard Avery says, you should really consult a plumber. Gandalf61 (talk) 13:52, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced Euro plumbing technology? In US plumbing, such a pipe should be extended to the outside as a vent for the toilet drain. It would be open to the sewers, and would admit sewer gases to the room, unless the "filter" somehow equalizes pressure without allowing out foul gas. Edison (talk) 14:17, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a description of an air admittance valve. Has this technology not reached the colonies yet ? Gandalf61 (talk) 14:31, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The cistern siphon has not reached there yet. Flush_toilet#Tank_style_with_siphon-flush-valve. 92.29.117.205 (talk) 14:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Environmental Skepticism and Global Warming Skepticism

Some people claim that the purpose of environmental skepticism is to protect the economic interests of businesses and industries. For example, some people claim that the purpose of global warming skepticism is to protect the economic interests of businesses and industries.

What do environmental skeptics think about this claim and accusation? How have they reacted and responded to it? What do global warming skeptics think about this claim and accusation? How have they reacted and responded to it?

Have Bjørn Lomborg, Penn Jillette, and Teller heard about this claim and accusation? If so, then what did they think about it? How have they reacted and responded to it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.174.63.234 (talk) 10:39, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The same as the last dozen or so times you asked this question...Is there some greater purpose to all these near-identical questions you've been asking? Vimescarrot (talk) 11:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Man, if you really care about what these three people think, go read their books and watch their shows. Don't endlessly post specific questions on here. It does not take any great ingenuity to imagine what a skeptic would say to such statements if you understand their mindset. What do you think they would say? "Oh, I guess you're right, the whole purpose of my argument is to promote economic interests of businesses and industries?" Obviously not. They counter a sociological claim with another one: that global warming advocates are liberal elitists who would like to use the threat as a means of getting people to live their lives according to a more liberal elitist model, and all that. This is not rocket science. Read the blogs if you want to see this in real time. It is really, really tedious to post endless variations of the same question on here. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:23, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

why "life boy" still hold the market share in India at the semi urban and the rural area?

The life boy one of the oldest FMCG products in India still holds the market share in India specialy in the rural and the sei urbar area. But if the rule of product life cycle does not go with the product.Life boy also not change their product line, then how it's carry the market share.

I try to answer this case. My answer is as follows...

All tough "life boy" is a old product, but it continually try to change there product life. They change the product package and product flavor.

that is why they can still hold the market share in India at semi urban and rural area.

please make necessary editing. and some others points and suggestion.

Pras9874 (talk) 14:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with "life boy" (although I have heard of Lifebuoy (soap)), but I will remark that one does not *need* to change the product in order to stay relevant. A prime example of this is Coca-Cola, which carries a large amount of the market share for soft drinks *because* it's the same as it always was (e.g. the New Coke debacle). The appeal to tradition/nostalgia is also very strong in the soaps and fragrances market, as the distinctive smell of a particular soap reminds you of home/mom/grandma/etc. I, for one, use many of the same soaps and cleaning products that my parents did, as other ones just don't work or smell "right". -- 174.21.233.249 (talk) 15:52, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hans Einstein House in Greenville, SC

What is the street address for the Hans Einstein House in Greenville, SC? I understand that it is open for tours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.230.104.94 (talk) 15:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Home Internet

if you rent a home in the uk, do sometimes the internet included in the rent price? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prize Winning Tomato (talk • contribs) 15:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 259: / Line 259: @@
 == Environmental Skepticism and Global Warming Skepticism ==
-{{hat|Asked and answered}}
 Some people claim that the purpose of environmental skepticism is to protect the economic interests of businesses and industries. For example, some people claim that the purpose of global warming skepticism is to protect the economic interests of businesses and industries.
@@ Line 268: / Line 267: @@
 :Man, if you really care about what these three people think, go read their books and watch their shows. Don't endlessly post specific questions on here. It does not take any great ingenuity to imagine what a skeptic would say to such statements if you understand their mindset. What do you think they would say? "Oh, I guess you're right, the whole purpose of my argument is to promote economic interests of businesses and industries?" Obviously not. They counter a sociological claim with another one: that global warming advocates are liberal elitists who would like to use the threat as a means of getting people to live their lives according to a more liberal elitist model, and all that. This is not rocket science. Read the blogs if you want to see this in real time. It is really, ''really'' tedious to post endless variations of the same question on here. --[[User:Mr.98|Mr.98]] ([[User talk:Mr.98|talk]]) 12:23, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
-{{hab}}
 == why "life boy" still hold the market share in India at the semi urban and the rural area? ==