Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Science/January 2006

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] January 1

[edit] Origin of the universe

The question of the origin of the matter in the universe is no longer thought to be beyond the range of science ... everything can be created from nothing ... it is fair to say that the universe is the ultimate free lunch. — Alan Guth, The Inflationary Universe: The Quest for a New Theory of Cosmic Origins

is he right?, can something be created from nothing? I don't get how....--Cosmic girl 01:50, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

(I'm sorry for the boxes, I don't know why they apeared)

I fixed that for you --Trovatore 02:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

thank you:)--Cosmic girl 03:03, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

The origin of the universe is one of those things that will make your head hurt if you think about it too much. The fact is, nobody's really sure how the universe started. But they're working on figuring it out. -- Cyrius|✎ 04:20, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the author of the book you cite might refer to, but it's true that quantum mechanics allows the creation of temporary virtual particles from nothing. Some popular science theories have indeed suggested that the big bang might amount to little more than an unusually big vacuum fluctuation from which the matter and energy that makes up the universe emerged. Such an event would be incredibly unlikely, but, given limitless time, might nonetheless be expected to occur eventually. This could be taken to imply that the entire universe is virtual, composed of matter and energy that only exist temporarily. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:17, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Interesting... and so if the universe was indeed virtual (which I think it is)there would be no need for anything else than a vacum besides the virtual matter and energy?--Cosmic girl 17:45, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah...and all this sounds exactly like (Zen) Buddhism! deeptrivia (talk) 18:01, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
The canonical example of creating something from nothing is Pair production. Of course, that still requires energy to make it work.--Fangz 20:07, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Leap Seconds

Was December 31's leap second added in the morning or at night? (Going on to January 1)

Well, whichever way you look at it, 12:00:01 is still night, isn't it? Atleast in the traditional Indian system morning starts at twilight. deeptrivia (talk) 02:29, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

It was added at 7 PM Eastern time (the time zone for the Eastern United States) which was the same as 12 midnight GMT. So whatever that works out to for where you are, that's when it was added for you. Dismas|(talk) 04:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
To be more specific, leap seconds are always added to the end of the old day as reckoned by UTC; as Dismas notes, the time in your local time zone will depend on where you are. Normally 23:59:59 UTC is followed by 00:00:00 of the new day (which is also 24:00:00 of the old day according to ISO 8601, so that midnight belongs to both days). With a leap second, 23:59:59 is followed by 23:59:60, then by 00:00:00 (or 24:00:00).
If you go still finer and look at milliseconds, say, then 23:59:59.999 is followed by 23:59:60.000 to start the leap second, then 23:59:60.001, and so on up to 23:59:60.999, then finally by 00:00:00.000 (or 24:00:00.000). In Eastern Time in the US, similarly, the time 6:59:60.999 PM occurred during the leap second last night.
--Anonymous, 2006-01-01, 20:42:24 UTC (give or take a couple of seconds)
-it was added before going into the new year

[edit] What is the agama bean?

This paragraph is from the last page of Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park:

Well, it was odd. They [the escaped dinosaurs] would only eat agama beans and soy, and sometimes chickens."

In the novel, the dinosaurs were engineered to suffer from lysine deficiency. Therefore they need to eat foods rich in lysine to survive in the wild. What is "agama bean"? -- Toytoy 03:57, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I suspect its fictional. I couldn't find any reference other than to the Crichton novels.-gadfium 04:06, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I also failed to find clues other than the cited paragraph in the novel. I have a copy of the "Advanced Reader's Edition" of Jurassic Park. The paragraph was not changed beween the ARE and the released final version. There are certainly some lyine-rich crops in Costa Rica. They have farmers. I just couldn't figure out why Crichton would need to fabricate the name of a bean. Maybe it was a typo. -- Toytoy 04:16, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
According to dictionary.com and a google search, it's the name of a type of lizard, a place somewhere in the world, a company, and a few other things in languages I can't read. Nothing about a bean so far. Black Carrot 06:47, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Evolution, absence of "intermediate forms"

Darwin stresses that the most formidable obstacle to his theory is the absence of "intermediate forms" in the geological record. His explanation is a rather weak claim that these cannot be found because the geological record is "imperfect to an extreme degree." How does modern science explain this point, which I'm sure is still brought up by creationists? --Tothebarricades 04:48, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

There have been many discoveries since Darwin's day. See transitional fossil and List of transitional fossils.-gadfium 05:07, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
There are lots of intermediate forms. The moths in industrial England which surived in black because they blended in with the smoke-colored trees, but were eaten when in white form. The various birds and reptiles in the Galapagos ... User:Zoe|(talk) 05:16, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
The whale fossil record is very complete. This was not the case in Darwins day. Science is continually collecting more data. To cite Darwin and assume that there are still no intermediate fossils means they are ignorant on the topic. David D. (Talk) 05:21, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

The ignorant have been telling that lie for a century. Every time an intermediate fossil form is found, someone says, well where is the one intermediate to that! However far more important than the fossil record is the genetic record: every aspect of molecular biology has confirmed the fundamental applicability and usefulness of Darwinism as our best model for the obvious interrelateness of living things. See this week's issue of Science for a review of this year's advances: [1] alteripse 06:14, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Quite an easy proof for creationist to dismantle evolutionary theory would be to use DNA evidence to show that organisms are not in a nested hierarchy. We are still waiting for the damning evidence. David D. (Talk) 06:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I think creationists and all those guys should like...feel guilty for what they are doing, seriously...--Cosmic girl 19:14, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] calamine formula

(no question)

A: It's ZnO + Fe2O3. See this deeptrivia (talk) 06:21, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Latin translation

Is there a Babel-fish style Latin translator on the internet? --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 06:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, just type into Google "free latin english translation" -- Mac Davis ญƛ. 08:04, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] who are the greatest scientist ?

(no question in body of text)

  • That depends, who's opinion do you want? = Mgm|(talk) 10:29, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Many (but not all) of those generally regarded as the greatest scientists of the 20th century is given by the list of winners of the Nobel Prizes in the scientific divisions. However, if you're looking for an all-time honour board, Isaac Newton and Charles Darwin are two would be close to the very top of most people's. --Robert Merkel 11:12, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Charles Darwin? o.0 What did he do but evolution and natural selection theory? I know any physicist would rank Isaac Newton and of course Albert Einstein. -- Mac Davis ญƛ. 11:44, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, just evolution. Minor contribution. --Tothebarricades 17:40, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh come on, it has to be Leonardo da Vinci. He was at least 300 years ahead of his time.--Goshawk 14:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I think Leonhard Euler is probably one of them. – b_jonas 14:29, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Let's add Stephen Hawking to the list. -JvH 1 January 2006
Nikola Tesla! Nobody remembers the guy, but he's pretty much the responsible for the advances that made electricity cheap, reliable and available to everyone today. So therefore, he had a huge role in the entire development of civilization in the last century! ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 19:59, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I'd say some of the more forgotten ones; Kelvin, Lavoisier and Robert Hooke made some major discoveries, yet are almost unknown compared to Newton or Einstein. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:29, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Richard Feynman —Keenan Pepper 21:14, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Galileo - Akamad 21:35, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Aristotle should get a nod. Most of his theories are wrong - and most scientists these days would call them "unscientific," not least because they're wrong - but he's hard to beat for priority and long-term influence. Personally, I second the vote for Newton. --George 21:49, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm. Feynman and particularly Hawking wouldn't make my list (brilliant scientists as they both were). In no particular order, Louis Pasteur, Copurnicus, and Galileo would rank well above them. I'd be hesitant about Da Vinci because he, genius that he was, he never bothered to tell the rest of the world about his discoveries.
The other comment about "great scientists" is that, today at least, the scope for an individual scientist to make a great breakthrough has been much reduced. We've tackled much of the low-hanging fruit, and further scientific progress, particularly on the experimental side, will often be the result of a cast of thousands. --Robert Merkel 22:07, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Copernicus hardly said anything new (see Heliocentrism) Probably won't even figure in my top 100. deeptrivia (talk) 23:01, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Bah! You're all wrong. Troy Hurtubise. --ParkerHiggins ( talk contribs ) 00:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
If we're talking about practical uses of electricity, then Edison deserves a mention too. – b_jonas 11:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Edison wasn't a scientist. He was an engineer and entrepreneur, and especially a good manager. Read our article. --Robert Merkel 12:19, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

And then there's Tycho Brahe. although he was mostly good at collecting top scientists around him. And Mendeleyev; the period table represents quite a jump in our understanding of the world. The argument against Copernicus also goes for Darwin, I believe, because he also largely just regurgitated things that had been though of before but no-one dared say out loud. But all this and the above all focus on fairly recent (and western) history. There were quite a few impressive scientists in old Arabia and India, although I can't think of any names from the top of my head. For an extensive list of more recent names you could also look at the list of Nobel Prize winners. DirkvdM 12:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Descartes definitely belongs on any list, since his foundational work on philosophy of science was pretty important in the scientific revolution, plus he created the coordinate system that we still use today. Night Gyr 16:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] attitude towards religosity

(no question)

[edit] Edge detection

What type of filtering is edge detection?

I'm not sure how to best answer your question, so I will provide you with a link to a simple edge detection scheme here instead, and from there, you can figure out what type of filtering is involved. --HappyCamper 16:21, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Combining Impedance

When you parallel combine a capacitor with a resistor and inductor bound in series, what is the impedance? I will also need a magnitude.

\left [ \frac{1}{R + j \omega L} + \frac{1}{j \omega C} \right ]^{-1}\; Did that make sense to you? deeptrivia (talk) 17:49, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Finding magnitude is easy. Separate real and imaginary parts, square them up, add them and take the square root. deeptrivia (talk) 17:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it did. Thank you.

Shouldn't that be \left [ \frac{1}{R + j \omega L} + {j \omega C} \right ]^{-1}\; ? GangofOne 10:21, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely! Dunno how that error creeped into the LaTeX version of it. deeptrivia (talk) 20:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] science vs. pseudoscience

Hi, I wonder how can I, not being a scientist,distinguish real science from pseudoscience in popular science articles, regarding things like quantum mechanics, cosmology and things like the mental effect on health...because there seem to be a lot of articles that have views that sound a little far fetched to me, but they might as well be true, so I need some advice on which skeptic tools should I examine claims with, but I don't wish to dismiss them either, I just want to know if they are true or false.--Cosmic girl 18:35, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

See pseudoscience and this excellent link on how to spot bogus science. alteripse 18:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thank you :), what about what Gerald Schroeder says, for example? --Cosmic girl 18:54, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
From the Gerald Schroeder article and from his homepage, as far as I can tell he has not published his results in any peer reviewed journal - which is about as clear a sign of pseduoscience as there is. Raul654 19:02, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I had not heard of Schroeder, but there is a long tradition of pious attempts to reconcile particular readings of Genesis with particular scientific models. I think the basic hazard in such activities is that science and religion are two distinct ways of looking at the world, and they have different methods and different epistemologies (ways of deciding whether something is true). Trying to evaluate one with the methods of the other may be of interest as a mental or spiritual exercise but is unlikely to produce new knowledge because both bodies of knowledge make assumptions that cannot be proven or disproven by the methods of the other. For example, a basic assumption of science is that all natural phenomena follow regular, describable rules and meaningful assertions must at least in theory be testable against present and future knowledge and be replaceable if new evidence indicates it. In contrast, theological knowledge generally assumes the existence of God and meaningful assertions are evaluated against the fundamental premises of a specific religious perspective. This is why the whole intelligent design movement seems so dishonest to intelligent people-- it is a denial of the basic assumptions of each body of knowledge and a confusion of their methods. Schroeder seems to be reformulating some essentially religious concepts in the terms and concepts of contemporary physics. I would disagree with Raul that he is claiming to be producing new scientific knowledge and therefore I wouldn't condemn it as pseudoscience. alteripse 19:24, 1 January 2006 (UTC)


If your unsure, try checking out the WP article on the topic. Or if that fails as well, ask here for a followup. :) TERdON 18:57, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you guys, I meant more like, is Schroeder basing his claims on coherent and testable things? or ar his asumptions about physics somewhat dubious.--Cosmic girl 22:14, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

The article was pretty crap (only statements are those from supporters), so I edited it to add notable criticism for NPOV. From the information I can find and verify, the guy's a total crank and loon.--Fangz 01:55, 2 January 2006 (UTC

thanx, u rock, I'll take a look at the article. :) --Cosmic girl 15:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Effects of H-Bombs

I read this today, at [2]

Do you remember those doctors a few years back who got together and announced that it was a simple, clear medical fact that we could not survive even a moderate attack by hydrogen bombs? They were not welcome in Washington, D.C.

Even if we fired the first salvo of hydrogen weapons and the enemy never fired back, the poisons released would probably kill the whole planet by and by.

Is there any truth to the second statement? I've never heard it before, and it doesn't show up on the Nuclear Weapon article

--JianLi 20:25, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Fusion bombs can't be that bad because they have actually been detonated. The first one was Ivy Mike. This description sounds more like a salted bomb. —Keenan Pepper 21:38, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • It depends on how many bombs there are and what kinds of bombs they are — depending on the design of Teller-Ulam design weapons, they can generate a lot of fallout or they can generate very little. Whether a single nuclear attack would result in something like that described above depends very much on what assumptions you make about the number of weapons, the types of weapons, the total yields, how high above the ground they are detonated, and probably some moderate guesses about weather patterns. See our article on nuclear fallout for more information on this.
  • Some people (usually those very much opposed to nuclear weapons) usually come out with calculations resembling a doomsday event, and other people (those who for various reasons think nuclear weapons are not necessarily mad) come up with more limited scenarios of the sort mocked in Dr. Strangelove: "I don't say we wouldn't get our hair mussed, but I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops!...uh, depending on the breaks."
  • As an aside, "those doctors" in question are probably a reference to Physicians for Social Responsibility. --Fastfission 22:06, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Ah, thanks. Curiously, there is no Wikipedia article on them, even though their website that you linked says that the were co-recipients of the 1985 Nobel Peace Prize, along with International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (maybe Vonnegut was referring to that group, too). The Nobel Peace Prize article, as well as the Nobel Prize official site [3] does mention the IPPNW, but not the PSR. Anyone know what's up with this? --JianLi 00:51, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
    • It seems to be a member of the IPPNW. I have created a wikipedia article for them accordingly--JianLi 00:58, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I still don't understand why no body ever thought... where in the US the bombs would presumably be detonated, and of course their specs change things. The part where they said "poisons released would probably kill the planet by and by," I can assure you that part is completely false. No nuclear bombs release poisons. I have a suspicion that the quote you supplied is made up. Human, as a species, could survive a heavy attack by fusion bombs, but countries may not. Here is a magnificant page about effects of nuclear explosions for you, and future reference. [4] -- Mac Davis ญƛ. 00:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
    • I suspect that the term 'poison' is being used to mean 'compination of radionucletides and toxic heavy metals' - e.g. radioactive strontium and iodine, and plutonium. Whist I have no evidence either way, it _is_ the sort of quote that would be made by someone uneducated or only passingly familar with the subject matter (so, that's journalists and politicians then). I very much doubt that they would kill the planet - but they could certianally do some dramatic localised changes Syntax 01:00, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
You might also be interested in the concept of nuclear winter, where if enough of these weapons got off in a war, it can kick enough dust into the atmosphere to seriously interrupt delivery of sunlight to surface of the planet, resulting in very rapid climate change of the global cooling variety. User:AlMac|(talk) 11:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fonts

How do I create my own computer font? Do I need a special program (ie. one not shipped with Windows XP)? smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:33, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I really doubt Windows ships with an outline font editor. I use Fontforge, which is ugly (at least until the new GTK interface works) but it works. It runs on Cygwin too. Hmmm, shouldn't Wikipedia have a Font editor article, or a Category:Font editors category? —Keenan Pepper 21:25, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
You may try FontLab Studio and Fontographer. -- Toytoy 18:17, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chemical Properties of Mercury

I've been looking online for awhile now, and I have been unable to find; Combustibility, Acid/Base properties, and typical bond types of mercury (Hg). Any answers would be greatly appreciated

       Thankyou~
              Edd
It looks like our Mercury article is missing a section on the chemistry of mercury, so I'll just tell you what I know. Mercury is not flammable. In fact, mercury(II) oxide readily decomposes into mercury metal and oxygen gas. Because it is not a very reactive metal, it only dissolves in strong acids. It forms two kinds of ions, Hg2+ and Hg22+, which is two Hg+ ions stuck together (Hg+ does not occur separately). —Keenan Pepper 01:00, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Elemental mercury is also highly volatile (and toxic!). Since it ionizes as a cation it can be used as a Lewis Acid in certain reactions. Being a metal, it participates in metallic bonding. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 05:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Water

Hi, is it true or probable that water will run out in the world? (meaning drinkable water, not ocean water) and that wars will be fought in the future over water resources? I read that somewhere as a futurist story which was intended as a warning... do you think it is true? or is it silly? and if it is true, why aren't governments and scientific comunities more concerned?. --Cosmic girl 22:38, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

In some places of the world, yes! There's fast rising population, deforestation, desertification, industrialization (water sucking industries), abnormalaties in rainfall, etc. Already in India, between state governments (among themselves and with neighboring countries) are tensions, disputes, and court cases over how to share river water, who gets how much, etc. The problem keeps becoming more severe year after year, and it won't be surprising if in the next 50 years, such disputes escalate into full-fledged wars. deeptrivia (talk) 22:52, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't know that! and don't we have the technology to fight that? or will we ever have it? ( like, desalinizating ocean water, or actually 'making' water like hidrogen fuel does or with nanotechnology?)--Cosmic girl 23:50, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

These technologies can work on small scale, maybe for a million or ten million people, not for hundreds of million people. Possible solutions for a large scale problem like this include rainwater harvesting. deeptrivia (talk) 23:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Desalination technology has gotten a *lot* cheaper over the past couple of decades, to the point where wealthy countries can easily afford it for urban water supplies. Israel's Asheklon plant produces fresh water from seawater at a cost of about 50 US cents per 1000 litres [5]. So wealthy countries aren't going to have a problem. It's the poor, as usual, who will suffer.--Robert Merkel 05:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that's quite true. However, note that the total population of Israel is less than 7 million. Some Indian cities with ~ 10 million population have desalination plants. With current technology, it would be a challenging task to desalinate water for over 1400 million people. Of course, technology is improving, so we can hope for better. The problem right now is not so much scarcity of water, but poor management and conservation. Also, 50 cents for 1000 litres looks cheap for domestic use, but it's real expensive for industrial use (think of irrigation, power plants, etc that use several mlds (million liter a day) of water in their process) deeptrivia (talk) 06:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Do you drink public water? The earliest sign of water commodification occurred over the last decade when the middle and upper classes stopped insisting that everyone have access to high quality drinking water, just as they abandoned the commitment that even children of poor parents have access to good education or crime-free neighborhoods. Both the water supply and the public schools in most large American cities have dropped below the level which upper middle class people consider acceptable. Those who can afford to drink bottled water and send their children to private schools do so, just as they pay for security in their own neighborhoods. Once you no longer rely on public drinking water, public schools, public libraries, and the police, it is easy to vote for politicians who promise to cut the taxes of the rich, as long as the streets, schools, and water are "safe enough" for other people's children. Dalembert 00:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

thank you:) but I meant more of a worldwide seriously threatning for humanity.--Cosmic girl 00:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I offered it as another facet of the same phenomenon: water is becoming a resource to be controlled for economic gain in more and more of the world. During your lifetime it will go from being like air to being like land (i.e., bought and sold, with no one any longer having a public "right" to it), even in the US. Dalembert 00:49, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Yep, I can second that. It's another related global issue. Companies like Coke are facing the heat. ([6], [7]) deeptrivia (talk) 00:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I really wouldn't be so worried. Global geopolitics is massively unpredictable on the 50+ years scale. 50 years ago, countries like India were only just created, and the world had no inkling of major water problems. It is entirely possible that as things get bad - and unlike, say, Global Warming, they probably can't go bad subtly and irreversibly - technological, logistical and regulatory systems will emerge to resolve it.--Fangz 02:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Highly optimistic, but probably wrong. I strongly recommend you to read this article and anything related to the subject of water wars. At the end it won't matter how much technology we may have to fix the problem if the poorest nations still can't afford to pay for it. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 05:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
To add to what Dalembert said. Also in Europe, water that is purified for drinking is polluted upstream in other countries, even if both countries are part of the EU (I'm specifically thinking about Belgium, Germany and especially France polluting the water flowing into the Netherlands). If even 'civilised' and internationally organised countries can't solve this then what hope is there for poor countries, especially when there are already disputes (which is often the case - our western relative state of peace is quite unique in the history of mankind). As for if this can lead to war, I know it has in the past, but I can't remember where right now. DirkvdM 14:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 2

[edit] Peritoneum vs. Mesothelium

What's the difference between these two? The articles on them don't really make it clear. TheLimbicOne 01:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Peritoneum is the abdominal space. Mesothelium is the membrane that lines it. In medical contexts the word peritoneum is used over a thousand times more often than mesothelium; in fact, peritoneal lining would be a clearer term to most doctors than mesothelium. alteripse 02:27, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Really? That's not how I learned it...the space is the peritoneal cavity. The peritoneum is the membrane that lines it—for instance, when performing abdominal surgery, it's the membrane that lies under the abdominal wall. Mesothelium is as I recall a more generic term for any type of epithelium that originates from mesoderm, including the peritoneum...I think. — Knowledge Seeker দ 02:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
See Steman's definitions of peritoneum and mesothelium, as well as Merriam-Webster's definitions of peritoneum and mesothelium. — Knowledge Seeker দ 02:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

My understanding is that peritoneum is the serous membrane that lines the peritoneal cavity and consists of parietal and visceral subtypes depending on what it is attached to. Mesothelium, a part of peritoneum, is the single layer of flattened cells which overlies the areolar connective tissue base (which varies in thickness depending on its location and functional requirements). This is analogous to skin, for example, which has an epithelium covering the deeper connective tissue matrix of the dermis. Thats basically what my anatomy text says, anyhow. And it seems consistent with Stedmans definitions (see above). Mattopaedia 03:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Now that I read it, the peritoneum articles has a few glaring inaccuracies. I'll put it on my 'to do' list. Mattopaedia 03:23, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Damn. I have to admit to being wrong. Although in practice we non-surgeons often use the terms peritoneum and peritoneal cavity interchangeably, the precise meanings are as offered above. Sorry. alteripse 03:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you guys. To: mattaopedia, I'm currently working on a clean up and merge of body cavity and would LOVE to know where the inaccuracies are. TheLimbicOne 03:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I just want to make sure I've got this correct. The coelom or pseudocoel (depending on the animal) develop from the mesothelium and (in the case of coelom) become the peritoneum. TheLimbicOne 03:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Type IV Immunity disorder

My doctor tells me that I have Type IV immunity disorder. Due to this I get small blisters under the skin of my palm, the blisters are very itchy and spread on itching. My doctor tells me that this condition occrs when I have a prolonged infection in my body, but i feel this only happens when I am stressed. I would like more details about this disorder and how to prevent its onset. thanks

I assume he is referring to type IV hypersensitivity reaction, which we do not have an article about. Here is a brief description: [8] Good luck. alteripse 04:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

See also Hypersensitivity#Type IV - cell-mediated hypersensitivity --WS 20:52, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, clearly we needed a redirect. alteripse 21:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why universe is dark?

Short answer: Because it had a beginning and is finite (see Olber's paradox). deeptrivia (talk) 04:27, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Last I checked, there was no evidence that the universe was finite. However, we can only see a finite distance because the universe started a finite time ago and the speed of light is finite. -- SCZenz 04:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I meant according to the most established cosmological theory, it has to be finite, since nothing can travel faster than light. The statement can of course be rephrased as "because it had a beginning, and light has a finite speed" deeptrivia (talk) 04:37, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, the visible universe has to be finite. We don't have any way of knowing what's outside the visible universe, although I think people usually assume there's more of the same stuff. -- SCZenz 04:41, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Doesn't a big-bang occuring a finite time ago, and the impossibility of anything (matter/waves/..) travelling faster than 300,000 m/s imply that the universe can't be any bigger than its age times the speed of light. Of course, I agree there's no way to experimentally verify the finiteness of size, and that it is expanding rapidly (at the speed of light?). deeptrivia (talk) 04:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
I read in The Whole Shebang that space itself can expand faster than light (inflationary theory or something; I haven't quite read into it that much). --AySz88^-^ 05:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I'm not aware of that. Thanks! Hopefully, the original question is answered though! deeptrivia (talk) 05:37, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Just for the record, it's also a misconception to assume the big bang must have expanded from a single point. The universe could have been infinite from the first fractional second of its existence, and as far as I can tell from the talks I go to that's usually what people assume. It's more like the universe expanded from every point; it started infinite, and is now much bigger. (In the sense that short distances within that infinite size are now long distances within that still-infinite size.) Weird, huh? -- SCZenz 05:52, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, it's a challenging concept, but it makes sense once you get your head around it. Too bad journalists always write it like the big bang happened in a particular place. Probably a big source of confusion. Tzarius 08:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
AND ANYWAY it's not dark, it just glows a color you can't see. See cosmic microwave background radiation. —Keenan Pepper 06:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Yup, you're right about the microwave background, but I guess in the question, "dark" was referred in the context of visibility (absence of colloquial "light"). Anyway, I guess for this question, we probably don't need to bother about whether the universe is indeed infinite, since due to the finite speed of light, such a proposition would not fit Karl Popper's criterion of falsifiability. deeptrivia (talk) 06:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

To ask a more elaborate question:

If the universe is infinite then at every point in the sky there should be a star, so the entire sky should be lit up. So why isn't it?

Who was it again who is credited with coming up with this question? One answer would of course be that the assumption is wrong the universe is actually finite (as already stated). But another answer is that there is dark matter that obstructs much of the light. Wasn't there more? DirkvdM 15:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

That's Olber's paradox, the first answer given. As far as physicists know Dark Matter isn't obstructing the light; we'd see evidence of that, and we don't. (It's called Dark Matter because it has no effect on light (or other particles) at all, aside from its gravitation.) -- SCZenz 16:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
It's known as Olber's paradox, but the first person to phrase the question was Kepler, as the article states. GeeJo (t) (c) • 16:46, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images of the Milky Way

If the universe is finite but unbounded, there must be geodesics which loop back around to where they started. So, there should be images of the Milky Way galaxy (or even larger structures that contain it) that appear to be very far away. If we saw one of these images with a telescope, would we recognize it? Is anyone specifically looking for them? It would be a pretty big breakthrough for cosmology if they were found, right? —Keenan Pepper 07:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Er, yes, kinda. I think I read an article in NewScientist about that, how it's possible the universe is finite without end, but the study didn't find any of the predicted artifacts in the background radiation (there would supposedly be a pattern or particular wavelength as a result?). So it could still be finite but larger than the Hubble distance, and we'd never see our own galaxy anyway. Tzarius 07:59, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] hair loss

I am 25 male.I have problem of hair loss.What r the possible reasons for that and is it neccessary to oil hairs daily?Use of shampoo daily is safe or not?I am living in bombay, india.Thanx...

See our article on baldness. It's most likely purely genetic. As the page mentions, there are now some reasonably effective medical treatments )the best known being mindoxil) that can stop further hair loss in a majority of people with genetic pattern baldness, and sometimes encourage regrowth, but they are expensive and need to be applied daily for the rest of your life or the hair will fall out. There are other options, including expensive implants or other cosmetic procedures, wearing a wig, or being proud of your bare skull. Oiling hairs and shampooing is unlikely to make much difference. --Robert Merkel 12:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Minoxidil? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
My brother started losing hair at a fairly early age and was almost bold when he was in his forties (just some hair at the back and sides). I started losing hair at about the same speed at the same age, but now I'm in my forties and I can't realy be called bold. The fallout stopped when I stopeed using shampoo. Mind you, I had already switched to baby shampoo (mostly for the smell really :) ), but that didn't help. And when I stopped using that, the first few weeks it even got worse before it got better (I almost sound like a neoliberal now :) ). I do have some bold spots at the temples and the crown, but that had already set in at an early stage and hasn't gotten much worse (the fallout hasn't completely stopped, but the change was quite noticeable). However, each individual is different and this might not work for others. Also, someone once pointed out that I have split ends, but that doesn't bother me at all (why should it, anyway? Just commercial bull, I suppose). DirkvdM 15:34, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

If you value your hair more than your testicles, getting rid of them to lower your testosterone would probably stop your hair loss. Your choice of course... alteripse 17:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

haha, he's right, it's testosterone that causes hair loss, but it's also the cloging of the pores which don't let vitamins go to your folicles (is that spelled right) so you have to get a shampoo that has vitamins in it, and you should put some smashed birth control pills in your shampoo, because they are a good source of estrogen, and it also makes hair pretty and plants grow...not kidding, give it a try. --Cosmic girl 20:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

FWIW, it's not actually testosterone but most likely 5-alpha reductase (which converts testosterone to dihydrotestosterone) that leads to baldness. --David Iberri (talk) 19:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

LOL, after reading the last two comments now I know why wikipedia has a disclaimer of "Wikipedia does not give medical advice". ;-) After alteripse's advice i am wondering if the user who asked about tetanus shots below is the same one that started this thread about hair loss. David D. (Talk) 20:47, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Extreme Weather

What are the kinds of extreme weather and how does each of them form? Thank you.

See the article Extreme weather. --Canley 11:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glycogenesis

Hi, I want to know where does glycogenesis take place? Thanks.219.65.191.160 15:55, 2 January 2006 (UTC)Dipankar Roy

Have you read our article on gluconeogenesis? It says that most of it is in the cytoplasm, except the actions of pyruvate carboxylase at the end. Although, it could be stated clearer in the article. 217.208.26.177 16:03, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Or if you want glycogen synthesis, which is different from gluconeogenesis, check glycogen. alteripse 17:37, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TWA flight 800

was there a german citizen by the name of herbst on the twa flight 800?

See the flight manifest. Noone listed as Herbst was on the plane, but I suppose its possible (though not likely) he went under another name. GeeJo (t) (c) • 16:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rationalied Solar System

What would be the consequences of a sysytem where the the earths period (time) of orbit would be an exact multiple of its spin time and the lunar period?

Well, for one thing it wouldnt last very long, since the spin time of the earth is increasing slightly every year (on the order of a few μs). GeeJo (t) (c) • 16:52, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Which would cause a change of a few seconds every million years. Whether that is much depends on the time scale the questioneer is thinking of. Also, many other things aren't constant either, such as the lunar period and Earth's orbit period. What is the reason for the question? The premise leads to an 'exact' duplication of any initial situation after one year. I suppose that is the purpose of the question, but I can't think what consequences that might have. DirkvdM 17:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


It would be a very simple world indeed! Suppose the ration of orbital time period to spin time period is in the integer ratio m is to n. Then a year would consist of, the highest integer less than m/n, days. This is called the floor function, represented as \lfloor m/n \rfloor. So, each year would lag behind by m/n - \lfloor m/n \rfloor days. When this adds up to more than one day, we would celebrate a leap year. The process will repeat itself after every least common multiple of m and n days. Because in LCM(m,n) days, there will be an integer number of years and days.--Sayanchak 18:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm a bit confused. I thought he said the period of orbit was an exact multiple, in which case m/n would be an exact integer, by definition. It sounds like what you're describing is closer to the way things actually are.
As far as I can tell, the only thing that would happen would be that the month could finally sync up with the lunar cycle (earth period-lunar period) and there would never again be a leap year(earth period-earth rotation), unless we just decided to do a few for old times' sake. I have read some interesting things about what would happen if the period of one planet was an exact multiple of the period of another planet near it. Apparently, the rhythmic pull of gravity between them would eventually send the smaller one shooting out of orbit, either inwards or outwards. Black Carrot 23:25, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course if n = 1, then \lfloor m/n \rfloor = m. Hence no leap years will ever be needed. Resonce effects will only cone in case of a three body problem. I guess the user is just asking about one star one planet system.--Sayanchak 10:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Universe

Is the universe finite or infinite? I can't seem to find the real answer...what is the scientific consensus about this?.thanx.--Cosmic girl 17:19, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

The term "infinite" is used by cosmologists to refer to a mathematical abstraction and it is not clear how that abstract concept relates to the physical properties of the universe. see this wikipedia article --JWSchmidt 17:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
The only consensus is that there isn't one. :) DirkvdM 17:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

hahaha!!! really? :) wow, I thought scientists knew it all! just kidding, I study psychology and I'm aware that we barely know the human psyche...but anyway, I'll keep searching, hehe. --Cosmic girl 20:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] water potential

I have read many articles on water potential in plant cells from many sites but can not find answer to these 2 problems: 1. what will happen if i leave a potato tissue in a sucrose solution for too long? will this damage the cell? 2. also does a potato cell have the same solute concentration as a onion cell? if not is the difference a significant one?

thank you inadvance for helping!

The reason you cannot find the answers is because these questions appear to be addressing a specific experiment. I suspect one that you did in class. For question 1 it all depends on the concentration of the sucrose solution. You need to read up on osmosis. For question 2, consider the experiment you did with onion and potato. As you increased the solute (sugar) concentration what would happen to the cells (this is the answer to question 1)? Did it happen at the same time? If so the water potential in the two cells is the same. If not which cell changed first and what would that imply with respect to the water potentials in the respective cells? David D. (Talk) 17:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

indeed your assumptions are correct and i understand and value your response but i would still like to know whether there is any 'scientific theory' or evidence that states that if a cell is left in a specific solution (say 1M sucrose solution)for a extensive period of time it will be damaged, such that it will not be able to carry out diffusion to the same efficiency..on which i can base my reasonings for a proposed method in a experiment.

A 1M solution of sugar is hypertonic with respect to a cell. Therefore, due to osmosis there will be a tendancy for the cell to shrink (plasmolysis). This means that the concentration of proteins and ions increase in the cell (less volume). At the cellular level this could cause problem for enzyme function. At the organismal level it could cause problems from a structural perspective, i.e. plants will wilt. Consider if the cell is in a hypotonic solution. Will this be more of a problem for animal cells or plant cells? Also consider how the water moves across the membrane so readily. Look up aquaporins. I hope this helps you on your way. David D. (Talk) 03:17, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Medical: Frequency of Tetanus Shots

Read the instructions at the top. This is not a search engine. What is your question about tetanus shots? alteripse 18:18, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

See vaccination schedule. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:59, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] what is a ferrous non ferrous and non metallic material ?

Ever heard of google? [9] David D. (Talk) 20:42, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't bite the newbies, even if they ask us to do their homework. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
You call that biting? I supplied the relevant google search links for their research. David D. (Talk) 20:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
What is a ferrous non-ferrous non-metallic material? Impossible? smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
I think unobtainium might have all those properties. =P —Keenan Pepper 21:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
What is a comma? Proto t c 12:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Energy Conservation

If a virtual particle appears in a vacuum, hits another particle and is then destroyed, then wouldn't energy conservation be violated? Thanks 70.28.225.151 21:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC) Max

No. —Keenan Pepper 21:55, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
The joys of vacuum energy. See also virtual particle, of course. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:02, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
If a virtual particle-antiparticle pair appears, and then one of the pair meets its corresponding antiparticle and the two mutually annhilate, then you are left with the (previously) virtual particle remaining, but a real one destroyed, and therefore there's been no net change (simplified). — Knowledge Seeker দ 22:14, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
That's not how it happens. The virtual particle AND its anti-particle appears in vacuum, and they both annihilate instantly, so nothing is violated. See virtual particle andvacuum energy ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 22:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
As far as I remember, such virtual particle/antiparticle pair creation in empty space is made possible by borrowing energy from the uncertainty principle. This can happen only for a duration as small as the Planck time, and according to Quantum mechanics, energy conservation is not valid for such small time durations (there are fluctuations of energy at that time scale.) This is what I read somewhere. Am I correct? deeptrivia (talk) 05:04, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, that's not really correct. In the early days of QED, people did their Feynman diagrams in a noncovariant way, so that 3-momentum was conserved, but energy was not. In those days, people liked to say that virtual particles borrowed energy from the vacuum. These days people do covariant Feynman diagrams where 4-momentum is conserved at every vertex, and they say that virtual particles live off their mass shell, which means they violate the relation p^2 = m^2 (the solution of which is a 3 dimensional hyperboloid shell in the 4 dimensional momentum space). So the answer to your question about borrowing, deeptrivia, is that it's a matter of convention, or terminology. Under today's conventions, the answer is no, no such violation occurs. The reason that a seemingly well-defined question "do virtual particles violate conservation of energy?" can fail to have a unique answer is that virtual particles are just incomplete parts of a whole theory. They're not measurable. They're just terms in a series expansion, only the infinite sum of which has physical meaning which is independent of your point of view and can be measured. And of course in the physical sum, there is no violation of conservation of energy. -lethe talk 23:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


Yes but if some of the energy were transfered, it could not be payed back. Max 216.209.153.123 13:26, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

You are correct, that if such an interaction could happen, it would be a violation of conservation of energy. That's why it cannot happen. The Feynman diagram describing such a process is called a tadpole diagram, and tadpole diagrams always cancel each other out in an anomoly free field theory. I suppose there might be a more physical intuitive way to explain why this doesn't occur, but I don't know it. You might try asking at the tadpole page. -lethe talk 23:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

What makes tadpoles always cancel out? What does the circle represent? 216.209.153.142 13:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC) Max

The circle represents a particle antiparticle pair. Imagine that time is the vertical axis of that picture. So at t=0, you start at the bottom, and you have one line with an arrow coming out of the bottom and pointing up the left side, and another line with an arrow going down, coming into the bottom. The second line is pointing backwards in time, since time increases as you go up, but the arrow is pointing down. An arrow that's going backwards in time represents an antiparticle, while an arrow that faces forwards in time represents a particle. Thus I have a particle going up the left, and an antiparticle going up the right. In short, there is a particle/antiparticle pair production happening at the bottom of the graph. Virtual particles that come out of the vacuum always come in pairs like this.
the tadpole
Somewhere in the middle, the particle on the left ejects a photon (this could be a collision with a photon instead. doesn't much matter whether it's an emission or a collision, both have the issue with conservation of energy that you mentioned). as time progresses, you get to the top of the diagram, and the particle and antiparticle meet up again, and annihilate. The photon has carried off some energy, so it would appear that energy conservation has been violated.
Now as for why these diagrams give vanishing contribution, well, for QED (photons and electrons), there's a theorem that says that any diagram with an odd number of photons interacting always gives zero. That's known as Furry's theorem. All I can say about that is, it's part of the theory. The theory is built from the ground up to respect conservation of energy, so of course in the end, conservation of energy always holds. Just do the calculation and you can verify it. I suppose this isn't a very satisfying answer. What you'd really like is for some physical description of what keeps these particles from acting in this way. Like I said before, I don't know a nice physical explanation. The best I can say is that virtual particles aren't free to do what they want the way that real particles are. Virtual particles aren't real; meaning that they're artifacts of the mathematics that we use to approximate real particles. They're only intermediate terms in an infinite sum which represents the real particles. They have to take into account all the interactions in the diagram, they can't just do what they want at each moment, and wait until later to find out if energy gets conserved. They're bookkeeping devices to aid in the calculation, and are subject to the rules of the caclulation. In QED, you can argue for the vanishing of this diagram through charge conservation or Lorentz invariance, but those won't apply to scalar QFT (like, say the theory of pions). In that case, you probably just have to plug through the calculation.
But let me just say again, just because I don't know a physical explanation for why this interaction is ruled out, doesn't mean that there isn't one. Some really smart people can sit down and think hard about virtual particles, and give somewhat useful descriptions of how they move and how they're allowed to act. So you might try asking around. I was thinking maybe we could ask Lubos, who wrote the article tadpole. If you'd like to carry this conversation further, you might try coming to my talk page, since I don't check this page so often. -lethe talk 02:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 3

[edit] pop?

How many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie roll pop?--172.172.212.217 02:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Science can't answer that without enough data, which I don't think you posses either.lol --Cosmic girl 02:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

When I was in elementary school, I tried this little experiment. I had a brown Tootsie Pop which I licked in two ways: 1) a conventional sweep of one side of the pop against the extended tongue, 2) placing the whole pop in my mouth, closing the mouth, and pulling the pop out (for a sort of all-over "lick"). I checked the pop after each "lick" for visible Tootsie roll and, much to my surprise, saw it first at precisely 1500 "licks." Not the most valid experiment, but it's an answer. --George 03:00, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
From the article, Tootsie Pop:
According to the official Tootsie Roll website, Tootsie Roll Industries has received over 20,000 letters from children claiming to have solved the riddle since the commercial first aired in 1970. The typical range of responses is between 100 and 5,800 with an average of 600-800. There is no official number, as everyone's saliva and licking method is different.
According to Tootsie Roll Industries, there have been several scientific or pseudo-scientific studies attempting to answer the "How Many Licks?" question, including the creation and testing of two unique "licking machines" by engineering students at Purdue University and the University of Michigan. —Keenan Pepper 03:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmm...a very interesting question. I may save it for use when I interview people for permanent job positions. --HappyCamper 03:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
What for? Black Carrot 23:38, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Non zero value

what is 'non zero value'? ( concerning the higgs boson)--Cosmic girl 03:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Oy vey. The Higgs boson is a quantum (i.e. a little piece) of the Higgs field, which is represented mathematically as a complex function (that is to say, a function whose values are complex numbers) of space and time. The Higgs potential is the energy of the field as a function of the value of the field. The reason particles have mass, according to the usual Higgs mechanism, is that the minimum value of the Higgs potential (where the universe "settles") is at a place where the complex value of the higgs field is not equal to zero. As a result, which one obtains through some calculations, certainl particles gain mass, where they were massless before. That probably doesn't fully help, so please ask more questions! -- SCZenz 04:13, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

thank you! :D u r very nice, well I know nothing about physics(I study psychology which I guess has nothing to do with physics), but I kind of understood what you said... so, now I want to know what would happen if the minimum value equaled zero? that means particles would have no mass? and if there was no mass what would there be, just nothing? because I don't understand what is mass either...haha. thanks again --Cosmic girl 19:03, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

No mass does not necessarily mean nothing. The commonest exampe would be a photon. They have zero rest mass, yet they exist and are entering your eyes as you read these lines.--Sayanchak 10:52, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

cool :) , so what is more fundamental, a photon? or a higgs boson? (maybe I ask silly questions, but I'm not a physcist) --Cosmic girl 23:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

To me that's comparing apples and oranges. The photon is the force-carrying partice for electromagnetism, one of the four fundamental forces (in fact, along with gravity, one of the two long-range forces), but a Higgs boson would be the source of all mass. Which is more fundamental, mass or force? — Laura Scudder ☎ 23:22, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know... which is? --Cosmic girl 23:38, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grapefruit Juice + Baking Soda Specific Heats

Does anyone know the specific heat of baking soda and grapefruit juice? Please let me know if You all find out... Thank you very much! :) Gene Sparks

Sorry no body answered your question. Because you can't find this on the internet (you may but its hard!), you'll have to test them yourself.
Baking Soda: Use the guide at [10] to find baking soda's specific heat. If you have any questions leave me a comment on my User_talk:Mac_Davis.
Grapefruit Juice: Do the same thing, but obviously replacing the water with grapefruit juice, and not including the test tube and metal.
Here's a sample equation:
Calculate the specific heat capacity of copper given that 204.75 J of energy raises the temperature of 15g :of copper from 25˚C to 60˚C.
q = m x Cg x (Tf - Ti)
q = 204.75 J
m = 15g
Ti = 25˚C
Tf = 60˚C
204.75 = 15 x Cg x (60 - 25)
204.75 = 15 x Cg x 35
204.75 = 525 x Cg
Cg = 204.75 ÷ 204.75 = 0.39 J˚C^-1 g^-1
Sorry, I can't do LaTeX.
Here's a short guide for the military [11], and Britannica's [12]. Happy New Year -- Mac Davis ญƛ. 05:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Physics of hitting a wall

Take a standard, solid wall. If tap on that wall with my hand, will the wall itself be moved by that? I know that common sense would say 'of course not, that's not strong enough'. But even on an INCREDIBLY small scale, did I move that wall AT ALL? Flea110 03:47, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, because the wall is not totally incompressible. Also, some sound waves would have propagated through the wall, and that is motion. Tzarius 04:09, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Is the wall's physical position different 5 minutes after I hit it compared to before I hit it (as a result of me hitting it)? Flea110 04:26, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Almost certainly not, but it's warmer. -- SCZenz 04:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
From a "pure science" point of view, it would be impossible to say it did not move/deform, even after 5 minutes. There would be some residual plastic deformation. But in even the most accurate of engineering models, you will assume that there is no movement/deformation at all. deeptrivia (talk) 04:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
To complete the last answer, a deformation can be elastic, meaning it bounces back to its original state, or plastic, meaning it stays deformed. Or a combination of the two. You'll get some elastic deformation (if not, how could anyone at the other side of the wall hear you banging?). As for plastic deformation, that can be local (a dent) or the whole wall may move. I assume your hand is too soft too make a dent in a brick wall. But whether the wall as a whole can move is more a matter of how well it is grounded. And that movement will most likely be a tilt, not a shift. So there are many variations of what you may be asking. And it's also a matter of precision. What defines the wall? Where are its boundaries? You can only say that with a certain precision. So the wall as a whole may have moved, but the movement will probably have been much smaller than that precision, so you can't say if it moved. Then again, I've seen some walls.... :) DirkvdM 12:56, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Put an extremely sensitive accelerometer on the wall before you lean on it. You will see that it moves, and generates vibration (seismic) waves. But the waves decay back to noise in a short time, since you will see that the wall is always shaking. The energy that you imparted to the wall propagates into the rest of the structure, and becomes heat. You will not have affected the molecular structure of the wall in any way, since all of the motion was elastic, and the amplitude was well below the normal live loads (like somebody walking by). Do the same experiment with a big earthquake, and the results are different. --Zeizmic 15:15, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dental Decay

what is the cuase of dental decay?

Your mouth contains a wide variety of bacteria, but only a few specific strains of bacteria cause dental caries, mainly S. Mutans and Lactobacilli. These bacteria convert available carbohydrates into acids such as lactic acid created through fermentation processes. These acids seep into the tooth and can wear away tooth structure. If conditions in the mouth are favorable, S. Mutans and Lactobacilli will continue to thrive and continue to secrete these acids. Bacteria, acid, food debris, and saliva combine in the mouth to form a sticky substance called dental plaque that adheres to the teeth.
It is most prominent on the grooved chewing surfaces of back molars, just above the gum line on all teeth, and at the edges of fillings. Plaque that is not removed from the teeth mineralizes into calculus (dental) (tartar). Plaque and calculus irritate the gums, resulting in gingivitis and ultimately periodontitis.
The acids secreted by S. Mutans and Lactobacilli in the plaque dissolve the enamel surface of the tooth. As the bacteria become more prolific, the bacteria will follow the advancing front of acid damage and infect the dentin within the tooth. Left untreated, carious lesions will increase in severity from small discolored stains to actual holes in the tooth (cavities). Cavities are usually painless until they grow very large inside the internal structures of the tooth (the dentin and the pulp at the core) and can cause death of the nerve and blood vessels in the tooth. If left untreated, complications may occur such as acute pulpitis (infection of the pulp) or abcesses within the jaw.
Plaque and bacteria begin to accumulate within 20 minutes after eating, the time when most bacterial activity occurs. If plaque and bacteria are left on the teeth, cavities can develop, and untreated tooth decay can result in death of the internal structures of the tooth and ultimately the loss of the tooth.

Dietary sugars and starches increase the risk of tooth decay. The type of carbohydrate and the timing and frequency of ingestion are more important than the amount. Sticky foods are more harmful than nonsticky foods because they remain on the surface of the teeth. Frequent snacking increases the time that acids are in contact with the surface of the tooth. Yay that's all.-- Mac Davis ญƛ. 05:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't there some research done on a modified bacterium that was intended to displace s. mutans and lactobacilli in the mouth, without producing acids? IIRC they've done successful test trials on humans but are now held up at the FDA / approval stage. Can't remember any names. It'd be lovely to never have to brush again, yet always have sparkling white teeth... Tzarius 07:15, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, in Scientific American about nitrate, a preservative in processed meats, and found naturally in green vegetables. It was once considered unhealthy, and linked to link to stomach cancer. In the 1950s, researchers found that a class of these chemicals, N-nitrosamines, damages DNA, and causes cancer in rats and tested farm animals. Though, in 1994, Jon Lundberg of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, and Nigel Benjamin of Peninsula Medical School in Exter, England, researched and put out a report that the human stomach naturally harbors large amounts of these chemicals. Humans seem to’ve structured a symbiotic relationship with bacteria in the back of the mouth convert nitrate from food, to nitrite, which is swallowed, and chemicals in the stomach mix to create nitric oxide. The stomach is the main line of defense against ingested pathogens, though E. coli, and Salmonella can survive in it for hours, researchers found that nitric oxide killed the bacteria in minutes. Nitrites also, when ingested, cause the stomach to thicken their mucus lining, and to increase blood flow to the stomach, preventing infection and ulcers. Benjamin also found that major cavity-causing bacteria, self-destructed, when placed in a high nitrite environment, which in the future could have applications in the dental industry, and many other fields.

To return to the original poster's question, the only unequivocal facts about dental caries (tooth decay) is that three things must be present for it to occur:

  • a tooth
  • bacteria
  • fermentable substrate

That a tooth is necessary is self-evident. The other two factors have been demonstrated experimentally by using strains of germ-free rats, which do not experience dental caries until they are innoculated with cariogenic (decay-causing) bacteria and fed carbohydrate by mouth.

This does not begin to explain the wide variability of caries experience among individuals. There are more than a few cases where the bacterial load in a given mouth is off the charts due to poor oral hygiene and poor diet, yet tooth decay is absent. The converse is also true: excellent oral hygiene and attention to diet does not assure that tooth decay will not occur or even that it will not be rampant. This suggests that there are other factors that influence the incidence and severity of tooth decay-- whether it is some intrinsic quality in a particular person's tooth enamel, salivary antibodies, salivary enzymes, or some environmental element-- be it dietary or otherwise.--Mark Bornfeld DDS 17:25, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] death star

Is the concept of death star is feasible?

No. Currently, and in the future, no. Its too expensive. Not just money-wise, but its to big, its too bulky, it's made almost entirely of metal, maintenance costs, its a gas guzzler, and what would we use it for? You may be interested in Dyson spheres. Leave a message on my talk page if you want to know the myriad of reasons why it is either impossible or incredibly infeasible. -- Mac Davis ญƛ. 05:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Also see this guy's technical analysis of the Death Star. The quantities of energy required to destroy planets in the manner depicted in the movie is so enormous as to be highly unlikely, no matter how much technology improves. Not to mention wasteful; why bother vaporizing a planet when all you really need to do is wipe out the biosphere? --Robert Merkel 06:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Suppose a way could be found to make the hydrogen in the oceans undergo nuclear fusion, would that blow up a planet?
Why bother? Because it looks really cool! :-) Dismas|(talk) 06:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Indeed, this page shows a rough calculation of how much energy is needed to disperse an earth-sized planet, which works out to be approximately 2.4e32 joules (or 57,361,376,673,040,140 megatons of TNT). In terms of matter / antimatter destruction, you'd need about 2,670,360,134,547,751kg of matter and antimatter, which in a ball at the same density as Earth, would be about 9,742km across. Pretty large, if you ask me. (PS: that assumes 100% energy->KE conversion efficiency) Tzarius 10:39, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Here are a couple statements from the Star Destoyer link.

Statement #1

"Alderaan might have been a very tiny planet, so it would have been very easy to destroy". There is a fairly narrow range of planet types which can support human life. A human-habitable planet must have sufficient gravity to have retained an atmosphere after its formation, so Alderaan simply could not have been an extremely small planet. Furthermore, the Death Star has been explicitly described to be capable of destroying any inhabited planet.

OK, but Alderan may have been a small, ARTIFICALLY created planet. So it could have been build using superdense material material at the core to give it enhanced gravity.

Statement #2

So if we can't use melting energy or vaporization energy, how do we determine the energy requirement to destroy a planet? The answer, in one word, is gravity. If you wish to destroy a planet, you must scatter its mass so quickly that the forces of gravity cannot reverse the expansion process. In other words, you must accelerate the planet's entire mass to escape velocity. Another way of saying this is that you must bring the planet's gravitational potential energy state up to zero. The concepts of gravititational potential energy and escape velocity are both discussed in the science page. Using those concepts, the energy requirement for blasting a planet apart can be calculated.

The science page alludes to, but I cannot find where it says explicitly, that objects at the center have lower escape velocity than those at the surface. This is because the outer surface of the planet has gravity and tends to attract that at the center, away from the center. So it takes less energy to drive away the material at the center, than at the surface.

Depends, do you mean using current known physics, or unknown physics? Is FTL travel possible? What about time travel? I think that yes, a Death Star is feasible, but not with current technology, as with many other things.

MSTCrow 12:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

If you really want to kill everyone on a planet, a Death Star is an overblown (sic) and hideously bombastic way of doing so. It's far easier, and altogether more useful, to do what the aliens do in the novel Footfall. You just take your moderate sized spaceship out to the asteroid belt, grab a nice sized asteroid, and drag it back toward your target planet, engines at full blast all the way in. Turn aside at the last minute (or, better, use a robot spaceship for the whole deal) and let the asteroid whack into the target planet. The poor inhabitants suffer a giant tsunami and an impact winter. You can come back in a decade or so and find a nice uninhabited planet, with the climate returning to normal and all the life-sustaining lower organisms intact, but all the people who defied you killed in way the average interstellar-villain type will find particularly gratifying. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Or better yet, why not use a virus that mutates to infect and destroy all life on the planet ? Such a weapon was contemplated in a Star Trek: The Next Generation episode. StuRat 22:35, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Nah, viruses and other too-clever-by-half stuff are for amateur-hour villains. Sure, your minions told you that by the time you landed a couple of years later the virus would be gone, but you just know it'll be hiding in some lichen or something, just waiting for you to make your triumphal tour of inspection. The nice thing about the asteriod is the guarantee of no nasty surprises later - one big enough to kill all large animals is way too small to cause wholesale tectonic problems. You just need to remember to survey the impressive crater from orbit, and not by walking around on its edge saying prideful things. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 23:26, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] jackal

What are the good qualities of jackal which are used as to describe to a wise, clever person?

Tale of Two Cities I presume? :)
Dickens devoted Chapter 5, Book the Second to Sydney Carton, whom he nicknames “the jackal.” A jackal can also mean accomplice in the commission of menial or disreputable acts—the name seems fitting, for his situation. -- Mac Davis ญƛ. 09:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, sorry I may not have answered your question, erm.. jackals seize the opportunity to kill when they can. That may be smart. They work in twos, you could say, even though its just monogamous heterosexual relationships. A jackal may remind you of the cunning fox. -- Mac Davis ญƛ. 09:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Methane leakage from barometric pressure

Ok, this question might lead to a long answer, but here goes: I was reading this article [13] about the recently trapped coal miners and I came across this tidbit:

Coal mine explosions are typically caused by buildups of naturally occurring methane gas, and the danger increases in the winter months, when the barometric pressure can release the odorless, colorless and highly flammable gas.

How does this work? Is the winter average atmospheric pressure normally higher or lower than the summer (where I live I would guess lower because its raining all the time, but in places with cold clear winters wouldn't the pressure be higher?) How would a higher pressure cause the release of more methane than usual? If it's a lower pressure, am I correct in assuming that it has to do with the pressure relative to the vapour pressure?. And btw, Coal mining doesn't contain the answers (yet) so don't bother looking. -User:Lommer | talk 07:47, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe the methane was under pressure, in its own pocket inside surrounding earth. -- Mac Davis ญƛ. 09:34, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Take a look at Wind Cave National Park. I am sure that, away from the coast, the biggest deltas (air pressure) would come from winter storms. --Zeizmic 12:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC) p.s. this is a good read. [[14]]

[edit] Architecture

1. what are the guidelines for gesigning galery spaces?

2. what are the best conditions for showcasing art works?

3. how are the techniques of lighting employed in the lighting of artifacts?

4. what are current trends in the design of art exhibition facilities?


I'll be most grateful to have these information. Thank you.--81.199.78.102 17:25, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Could you let us know something about why you want this information? The reason for asking is that they do look a bit like homework questions. Numbering the parts of the question makes it look especially that way. Notinasnaid 17:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I am an architecture student tasked to design a "National Museum" and its poving dificult getting these information due lack of an appopriate case study in my country Ghana. hank you.--81.199.78.102 00:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I won't discuss the obvious things, like having a comfortable environment for the viewers of the art work, but will mention some more obscure considerations:
  • Large freight elevators must be available for lifting heavy objects, like massive sculptures, to the desired floors. Halls must be wide enough for fork lifts capable of carrying such works, as well.
  • In addition to the exhibit space, large amounts of warehouse space are needed to store objects not currently on display. An administration/personnel area is also needed. Gift shops, rest rooms, and cafeterias for the visitors may also be desired. The gift shops and cafeterias could be a source of financing for the museum, as well.
  • Light, especially sunlight, can damage many artifacts. The Shroud of Turin, for example, is quite photo-sensitve. For this reason, the exhibit areas usually don't have windows, but rather use adjustable lighting which can be turned down for sensitive exhibits. Tract lighting, for example, allows lights to be aimed at selected works, and away from others.
  • Security is a serious concern, since artwork may be worth millions. Placing portable, valuable art work near an emergency exit, for example, is a mistake, as a thief could smash the protective glass and remove the item then head out of the exit.
  • Fire suppresion is problematic in musuems, as water sprinklers used to control fire elsewhere can cause serious damage to art work. Use of nonflammable construction materials, like reinforced concrete, instead of wood, is critical. Areas with artwork which can be damaged by water should have such works covered in airtight containers and possibly also use a non-water based extinguishing system, such as Halon.
  • The flow of visitors through the museum should also be considered. It is more efficient if visitors can see everything without going through the same room twice. For example, a central atrium with numerous exhibition hall "loops" would keep visitors from going through any exhibit area twice, and would allow them to skip an exhibit which doesn't interest them. This will both increase satisfaction by those visitors and also will get them out of the museum as soon as possible, and thus limit overcrowding.
  • Parking should be sufficent for the maximum crowd for any event, and should also have security, both to protect the public and to detect any stolen artifacts before the thief can drive off.
  • A secure shipping area is needed for large sculptures which need to be handled with heavy equipment as well as small, hand-carried art objects. More mundane items, like toilet paper, could be delivered via another shipping entrance. However, beware that such an alternate shipping entrance could also be used to remove stolen artwork, so still needs substantial security, such as video cameras.
  • Small children can be a problem, since they likely will get bored and cry or whine when shown abstract art which they are not allowed to touch. One possible solution is to have a "children's area" with things which they will like, and can touch without damaging, like massive marble statues of animals, for example. This becomes an architectural issue if the children's area is specially designed, with lower drinking fountains, for example, to accomodate children.
  • Temperature and humidity must be rigidly controlled. Consideration should be given to underground exhibit space, as this makes temperature and humidity control easier, more reliable, and less expensive.
StuRat 02:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About the remote viewing thing... (and the Russian Revolutions)

Have gobvernments already give up on this? I can't understand how gobvts. of 1st world countrys could be doing things so cool like the space station, but also believe in those things like remote viewing...so if someone could clear this up for me. thanx.--Cosmic girl 17:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Cosmic girl. See remote viewing. It's generally considered paranormal phenomena and not based on the scientific method in any meaningful way. --Quasipalm 19:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
The thing is the gov is many different people, with many beliefs. THere is no one person who knows it all. The military/spy agencies sponsored RV experiments only because it MIGHT be true, just so they were covered if it were. They have a LOT of money to spread around, so they are constantly getting pitched by people who try to make them fearful. GangofOne 01:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
What you mean is not remote viewing but remote sensing. The country/government that was most into space stations was the USSR. When that govt changed it drastically reduced its investment in space exploration and the like. Anyway, you don't need space stations (ie the presence of people in space) to do remote sensing. A satellite or even an aircraft will do. By the way, you talk about first world countries and this makes me wonder; is Russia now a first or a third world country? It used to be 'second world' because of its state socialism. What is it now? Given the way its redistribution of wealth is going, combined woth the overall wealth, it's starting to look more and more like a third world country. DirkvdM 09:44, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I didn't say there needed to be space stations to remote sense... what I said was that I find remote viewing and remote sensing or whatever, silly, but I find the space program really cool, I never equated the space program with the remote viewing thing...they are two separate things. and I don't know what is Russia, but I'm sure it's not a 3rd world country, and I don't think it's a 2nd one either, and I also think that their abandonment of socialism was the best thing they could've done. --Cosmic girl 23:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

This is getting rather off-topic (then again it's your thread), but the way they dropped state socialism (not just socialism, but let's not get into that) was the worst thing they could do. Give a people who have been brought up with the idea that property is theft capitalism and what do you get? A country full of thieves (and a bunch of people who sit in stupor, still trying to grasp how and why the government support dropped out from under them). In 1990 I thought that the speed of the change was intended to give people such a shock that they would massively start voting for the communist party. If that was the plan it failed, although the communist party did get quite a lot of votes (and as the economy deteriorates it may still happen). I agree that, although the revolution was necessary, the USSR system that came in the place of the Tzars was in the long run not a very good idea - it was like a ladder that had to be climbed and then thrown away. But not the way they did it in Russia. China, however, is soing it the right way it seems. DirkvdM 09:39, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Addition: The best thing that happened to Russia must have been the February Revolution because that finally got rid of the Tzars (there had been many many bloodily suppressed attempts before that, illustrating the need). What would have happened if the October Revolution had not taken place and if that would have been better is anyone's guess. But one can also say that there was an historical necessity for state socialism. The movement was very string and it had to happen somewhere. Now we know about a few bad ways to implement it so we can prevent those in the future, mainly the possibility of too much power in the hands of one person (which was the original problem), which gave Stalin the power to kill millions. Alas history is repeating itself. Again, there is too much power in the hands of one person in Russia. Willmankind ever learn? And is there a remedy? Democracy is no failsafe solution, because Putin, Hitler and Saddam Hussein all came to power in a democratic system. I don't have the answer either. DirkvdM 10:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Except maybe parliamentary democracy, because there, no single person has power over everything - even the prime minister has just one vote and the specific fields are left to the ministers. DirkvdM 07:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
A quick note: First World doesn't have anything to do with the wealth of a nation. In fact, it is simply a carry-over from the Cold War. During the cold war, the US and its allies (mainly Western Europe) were called the First World. The Second World was the USSR, Eastern Europe, and China. The Third World was every other country not tied to a side of the Cold War. However, since the end of the Cold War, 1st World has been commonly used to describe a country with liberal policies and market economies, while the evolving meaning of 2nd and 3rd world countries isn't as clear. --Quasipalm 19:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Medicine: what is alexitimia?

Dear friends What is alexitimia? Couldn't find it in the wiki search. Thanks in advance.

Do you mean Alexithymia? Flea110 18:52, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] calving

What time of the year do cows calve?

I believe this document may answer your question. To quote the document, "There is no single date that is best for the start of calving" Flea110 22:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
In Sweden, cows can calve at any time of the year. The farmer usually tries to put more calvings in the spring though, because in summer you don't have to feed them with hay or silage, but let them eat the grass directly from the field (ie lower costs). Also, in the summer, the milk prices are higher (the milk consumption in Sweden is higher in the summer). TERdON 21:31, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photos of the stars from orbit?

Why is it that no photos seem to exist of the stars from orbit or space? I'm not talking about telescopic observations, but rather shots of what the starry plane look like, from the perspective of the human eye, while in space. For example, when the International Space Station or other spacecraft are photographed, space behind them always appears simply black. Is this how it appears to the eye or is this simply a problem of camera lenses? Furthermore, one would assume that, for example, from the dark side of the moon one would have a really spectacular view of the stars, but I have never seen any photographs from this perspective from the Apollo program. What's going on? Does the presence of the sun in space hinder the viewing of stars and turn space into a black blanket? Do the stars only come alive when you are orbiting about the dark side of the earth or the moon? Why are they never photographed?

I think this was answered before. Light inside the spacecraft reflects off the windows and obsures the relatively dim stars. Low resolution cameras used to take pics of crew aren't well suited to taking pics of star, either. Pics could be taken with a little effort, such as turning off the interior lights and taking along a high res camera, but this seems rather pointless, since we have much better pics from orbital telescopes, like Hubble, and even large ground based telescopes. StuRat 22:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, you don't need a high resolution camera for that, just shading, like the hood of Hubble or the length of a telescope, limiting the view to a small angle. It would, however, help to be on the outside of a spacecraft. The Apollo moonlanders seem an obvious choice for that because the astronauts left the spacecraft, but space walks took place before that. And the USSR could have done this from the very start. Which seems like a logical thing to do because it seems spectacular. But there are two 'buts'. Firstly, what do you photograph when you're out there? The stars? Hell no, the stuff you can't see from Earth, like the Earth from space and the dark side of the Moon. Which brings me to the second 'but'. The USSR photographed the dark side of the Moon (the most interresting part of the 'sky' we can't see from Earth) and the US later sent people around the Moon, who could then see it with their own eyes. Guess which received most attention in the general public. Of course this could be a political thing (maybe the US achievements received equivalently less attention in the USSR). But there's another, much more irritating aspect (going slightly off-topic now). There's a very common flaw in the perception of space exploration; you don't need people for it. In this case just a camera. No manned flight needed. I suppose it's partly the influence of Hollywood that makes people think that for space exploration to be 'real' it needs to be manned. Which is causing a problem for the financing because the people and therefore governments want manned space exploration which is tremendously more expensive than normal space exploration. So loads of allotted money gets wasted on useless stuff, leaving the real research in the cold. DirkvdM 10:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Go out into the countryside on a clear, moonless, night: your view of the stars is breathtaking. Now take a picture. Do you see stars on it? With an ordinary snapshot, no. You would need to put the camera on a support and take a shot lasting several minutes. If you wanted to photograph something else (e.g. a person) you would use flash; getting the stars in the shot too is possible, but needs some work, and a camera more capable than most. Indeed, if you saw a snapshot taken in space and it had stars along with some other brighter object, I would be very suspicious that it was faked. No stars shows it is real! Notinasnaid 11:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Banging my head against my keyboard. Astronomy and photography are two of my main interrests and I missed this one! DirkvdM 07:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Protein size - rule of thumb?

I am looking for a rule of thumb on the molecular weight of proteins. Any opinion of the "average" MW of proteins? Or the range of MW that most proteins fall in? I know this is an ill defined question, so don't bother telling me that..... ike9898 22:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

See Protein#Diversity --WS 23:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
A molecular mass of about 40,000 is fairly average. Proteins such as myoglobin and calmodulin are good examples of proteins that do not try to do a whole lot, but they show that a particular biological function can often be accomplished with a 15-20 kDa protein. Many proteins combine several functional domains and can easily be 40, 60, 80, 100 kDa. Many membrane proteins have multiple transmembrane domains plus a cytoplasmic and an extracellular domain. Transmembrane proteins in the range of 80-160 kDa are fairly common. Attempts have been made to identify all the proteins in various organisms. In Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae the average protein size is 388 amino acids (see). The recent article, "Protein length in eukaryotic and prokaryotic proteomes" says that among the Eukaryotic proteins analyzed the average protein was 361 amino acids long while in Bacteria the average was 267 amino acids. --JWSchmidt 00:05, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Thank you! Using another rule of thumb (number of amino acids times 110 = estimate of MW):
  • 388 amino acids represents a MW of about 42.6 kDa
  • 361 """" 39.7 kDa
  • 267 """" 29.4 kDa
ike9898 14:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] wind power

what are the advantages and disadvantages of using wind power?

Have you read the article, wind power? - Fredrik | tc 23:39, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 4

[edit] Champagne and soft drink bubbles

Where do these bubbles come from it often appears that they start from the middle of the fluid in random positions what governs this? they simply flow constantly from what appears to be a point of no gaseous pressure significance. (7121989 01:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC))

The carbon dioxide bubbles form from carbonic acid present in both. As for the location of nucleation sites, where the bubbles form, they can be node points on sound waves when you ping the glass, a small particle in the fluid, etc. StuRat 02:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Very interesting question. As StuRat said, the bubbles form wherever there are particles in the fluid, or on the sides where there are imperfections in the glass. A fun thing to do is put a raisin in the soda. It will become covered with bubbles until it floats up to the top, where the bubbles pop and it falls again. —Keenan Pepper 08:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

According Gérard Liger-Belair's recent study, it seems that they come from dust [[15]] --JianLi 00:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] X-ray machines at airports

1) HOw is it that the X-rays from these machines do not in the sightest damage film from cameras or laptops yet still be strong enough to penetrate luggage?

2) How is a thin strip of plastic able to protect those working around these machines from tissue damage?

3) Finally, When viewing objects being scanned there are usually two screens used by operators, one of a darker image and another in greenish tints what does each one do? (7121989 01:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC))

The X-ray machines used to scan carry-on luggage are not as strong as the ones to scan checked luggage as the items being scanned are generally smaller and can be more easily checked by hand. This is why the carry-on x-ray does not cause damage to film, electronics or people. The screens are different because one is looking for metal (such as knives or guns) and the other is looking for organic material (explosives, drugs, live animals). See How Stuff Works for a good explanation of airport X-rays. --Canley 02:18, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I think also that X-ray machines, both medical and for security, have become much much more sensitive, and so can use much less radiation than they used to. For medical machines, in addition to the obvious radiological benefit, it allows subtler detail to be visible. A few years ago I needed a foot x-ray, and on looking at it you could see the granular structure of my foot bones - it wasn't just white for bone, black for not-bone. That added sensitivity will be vital for looking for those soft things like explosives. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 02:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Photographic film isn't really very sensitive to X-rays; it's sensitive to visible light. In the bad old days of very high intensity airport X-rays, people did find fogging on their higher-speed films, but today's moderate or low-intensity scanners don't pose a threat to normal films. (Medical X-ray films aren't directly sensitive to X-rays either; a fluorescent plate is used to convert X-rays to visible light.) But I don't think it's just plastic that's protecting workers and bystanders; I think you'll find it's a plate of lead or other heavy metal. Sharkford 16:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possibility of X-ray goggles

By X-ray googles i don't mean goggles that emit X-ray's, which i know is odd i simply refer to a (portable) device able to penetrate clothing (and no not just of beautiful yound women, security too!) and reveal an image we can see, is this possible without using harmful high energy waves, if not what alternatives are there which come close? (7121989 01:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC))

There are many devices that use infrared (heat) cameras. Many clothing items allow heat to pass through. Any item between the body and the clothing will then show up easily. There is a lot of concern about these because show the outline of the body beneath the clothing. Also, pubic hair blocks visible body heat, so it the outline is visible. In the United States, anything related to nudity must be forbidden. So, we won't have publicly advertised infrared security systems anytime soon. As for hidden infrared security systems, they are probably installed and used in many locations already.
Want to make your own? Get a camera with a cheap pickup. It will have an infrared filter to block the infrared light (that makes the picture fuzzy). Remove the filter that blocks infrared and replace it with one that blocks visible light. Presto - you have an infrared camera. Then, hang out at the pool (where clothing is designed to allow the most heat to pass through), get arrested for taking semi-nude photos, and try to explain that you are just trying to make security better. --Kainaw (talk) 02:29, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Cheap CCD cameras are only sensetive to near infrared, and thus are only giving you a view of things that are slightly redder than red (it may see through some fabrics but only ones that pretty transparent to visable light). True heat cameras generally use expensive cooled CCDs. The cutting edge for this security scanning technology is Terahertz radiation. --Martyman-(talk) 07:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
That is accurate, but I think it needs to be put more simply. Infrared vision does not equal thermal vision, and unless all the babes are wearing several layers of "Congo Blue" filter gel (or if her body is, for some reason, hotter than 250 degrees C), you'll just get freaked out by how weird people look. Why would anyone want to make Geordi-LaForge-porn, anwyay? -Bethefawn 0206; 1.8.06

This was also asked at the miscellaneous ref desk. Please don't double post. DirkvdM 10:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

See Backscatter X-ray - it is effectively a "X-ray goggles". Samw 22:34, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help with heat!

Hello, I don't have a calorimetre and I need to find the specific heat of lemon juice and any kind of antacid! I can't calculate specific heat, so If anyone can help me by just telling me that would really help out!!! Thank you all so much! Aberforthbil1657

Here's a sample equation:
Calculate the specific heat capacity of copper given that 204.75 J of energy raises the temperature of 15g :of copper from 25˚C to 60˚C.
q = m x Cg x (Tf - Ti)
q = 204.75 J
m = 15g
Ti = 25˚C
Tf = 60˚C
204.75 = 15 x Cg x (60 - 25)
204.75 = 15 x Cg x 35
204.75 = 525 x Cg
Cg = 204.75 ÷ 204.75 = 0.39 J˚C^-1 g^-1
Sorry, I can't do LaTeX.
Here's a short guide for the military [17], and Britannica's [18]. Do you know how to do the experiment? -- Mac Davis ญƛ. 05:50, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] pain and screaming

What is the reason that people scream when subjected to intense pain? I understand the reasons for pain and its beneficial nature, but the reason as to why people scream when they hit their finger with a hammer, for instance, eludes me. Is there a reason?

--24.29.92.197 02:26, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

To enlist the assistance of other members of the tribe ("help, I'm being bitten by a lion") or to warn them of danger ("beware: I'm being bitten by a lion"). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 02:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Ever wonder if humans scream differently when wanting others to come help or wanting them to run away? --Kainaw (talk) 02:36, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Or how about other animals? — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:18, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Nah, we animals react in the same way in both cases, we're just programmed to scream, without thinking whether it is meant to attract others for help, or to warn them, or whether it is futile. Pigs/cows, etc. scream out loud in intense pain in slaughterhouses, and I guess humans will do the same, regardless of the fact that it's not going to make any difference. The screaming is not a result of a design, but it just happened that the mutants that screamed had better rate of survival in the natural selection process. And it's a reflex action, it doesn't involve thinking and decision making ("should I request help or should I warn?"). deeptrivia (talk) 06:29, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Wouldn't say whether it is a reflex action: it is more like a subconscious thing. After all, it only seems that animals with some developed brain: jellyfish don't scream, for instance, nor do a lot of insects. Dinosaurs and reptiles, probably moan in pain or something, or maybe that's a cliché from watching Walking with Dinosaurs. Anyhow, it's probably not so much that screaming has an evolutionary function, than having a brain does. It's just a primitive, basic, quick and forceful way to communicate: I mean, after all, having a language, or developing spears and bow and arrows aren't really evolutionary features than advantages that developed due to the evolutionary feature of having a brain. Then again, perhaps I'm arguing semantics: but there is a difference. A brain is more flexible because it can think of new ways to communicate; and perhaps change communication: after all, you can suppress your scream, and convert it into a more effective way of communication, if possible. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 13:58, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Also because screaming, through some mechanism that eludes me at present, helps stimulate the release of catecholamines (adrenaline/epinephrine etc) for the fight/flight reponse, and endorphines (the endogenous opioids) for pain relief. Mattopaedia 00:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] earth

i am working on a class project and i want to know how high u can jump on earth--66.38.206.223 02:39, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, you're on Earth, why don't you try it and measure how high you can jump? You could also look at the records for the sport High jump. See also Jumping and Gravity. --Canley 02:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
How can she know how high you can jump on the Earth unless you tell her? deeptrivia (talk) 15:50, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Why do you assume he/she is on Earth? The question only makes sense if he/she has never been to Earth, so doesn't know what 10 m/s2 gravity feels like. =P —Keenan Pepper 08:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Doesn't the question specifically ask "how high u can jump on earth"? It all depends how you define how high you can jump. Is it the highest from the ground? Then high jump records are what you need to look for, specifically Javier_Sotomayor who has jumped higher than anyone. However, there is also the highest jump above ones head. It currently stands at 59cm. David D. (Talk) 08:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

source

height above
head (cm)		 height of
athlete (cm)		 height jumped (cm) name nationality place date
59 173 232 Franklin Jacobs USA New York 27 jan 78
59 181 240 Stefan Holm SWE Madrid 6 mar 05

The high jump as an international athetics event has a rule that the competitor must jump using only one foot. So these records don't tell the whole story: it may be possible to jump higher using both feet. Gdr 12:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

It is not possible to jump higher with two feet than one. In the high jump, the trailing leg is used to provide much of the upwards momentum during 'take off', converting the lateral momentum of the run up into vertical motion. Watch the way the trailing leg kicks during a Fosbury flop. It is nowhere near possible to jump higher using both feet. For one, you wouldn't be able to have a fluent run up, thus there'd be no momentum to convert into upwards motion. Proto t c 12:41, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I assume Gdr is refering to the vertical jump test. It is described at the following link as below (note i am not sure how reliable this article is since they cite an incorrect world record for the high jump).
"The best measure of jumping ability one that does not depend on the jumper's height is the standing vertical jump. The individual stands facing a wall, and with arm extended and feet on the floor, makes a mark on the wall at the top of his or her reach. The person jumps vertically, making a second mark at the peak of the jump. The distance between these two marks measures the vertical leap. This is an accurate measure of leaping ability, as each part of the jumper's body rises the same distance. A typical athlete has a vertical leap of 1 1/2 to 2 feet; the best male jumpers attain heights of 3 1/2 to 4 feet."
The claimed maximum height for the vertical jump is 4 ft (I could not find a verifiable wordl record) and equates to reaching a maximum height of 122 cm. This is quite a bit lower than Sotomayors 143 cm world record high jump. David D. (Talk) 00:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Pssst - 243cm, not 143cm! Proto t c 12:48, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that ;-) what a dumb typo. I bet that made some people feel athletic for a split second. David D. (Talk) 20:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't thinking of a standing jump but a tumbling-style jump. Google finds this [19]:

[In 1954] Dickie Browning [did a] round-off back handspring over a high jump bar. That 7' 2" [218 cm] jump broke, at that time, the world's high jump record by four and a half inches.

There are photos at [20]. The high jump record is higher now, but a rising tide lifts all boats. Gdr 12:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Interesting article, but is he tumbling on a sprung floor? Would one be able to get the same bounce on a mondo track? David D. (Talk) 20:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What is a hepatitis a?

See the search box on the left of the screen? Try searching for "hepatitis" and see what turns up. --Robert Merkel 02:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Solutions

If I have a solution with several components such as milk, water, and ammonia, how can I find the specific heat of the solution? I know the specific heat of the individual reactants but I don't know how to determine the specific heat of the overall solution. If anyone knows please list in J/g degrees celsius, Thanks! johnbog456

If a chemical reaction is involved, then I guess it's not really possible to get the sp. heat of the products from that of reactants. deeptrivia (talk) 03:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
As long as there is no chemical reaction (ammonia and milk might react; not sure) The specific heat of a mixture is the sum of (the specific heat of each part * the proportion of the mass of each part). Post again if that doesn't make sense to you. (found at http://www.carnicom.com/drought1.htm )
There seems to have been lots of similar questions lately. --AySz88^-^ 05:44, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's right. Basically heat capacity (mass*sp. heat)is additive. So, (m1+m2)*C = m1*c1+m2*c2, where C is the sp. heat of the overall soln.deeptrivia (talk) 05:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cracking a Linux box

I half don't expect and answer to this or I'm afraid I already know the answer. Can I crack the root password on a Linux box without root access? I set one up several months ago and it has been sitting on my network contently doing nothing. Today when I tried to log in as root I found I'd forgotten my password. I tried all the various combinations I might have used to no avail. I still have a regular user but that's about worthless. It's running slakware 9.0 and I've upgraded the kernel to 9.4.22. I figure I might be able to make a boot/root floppy set and run setup. Will that work? Can I do the same from an iso image CD. I'd start searching Google, but I've gotten spoiled by Wikipedia's reference desk. It's not as fast but I don't have to choose from sixteen gizzilion possibilities. Thanks.--◀Pucktalk▶ 04:48, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Try booting with init=/bin/sh in the kernel command line. —Keenan Pepper 07:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to try that with an ISO CD, but I was kind of hoping to do it remotely. I don't have a keyboard or monitor attached and I don't really want to have to lug one into the other room. If I have to go through all that I may just wax the whole thing and put the slakware distro on it, assuming that will even work on a p133. Thanks.--◀Pucktalk▶ 07:54, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, remotely. Let's think about that. If you can get root access without a password remotely, then anyone can, right? =P The reason why the init=/bin/sh thing isn't a security hole is because you need physical access to the box. —Keenan Pepper 08:17, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
That was kind of what I meant by I'm afraid I already know the answer. Security bites at times.--◀Pucktalk▶ 08:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Others mentioned local root exploits. If it's been several months and you haven't accessed the machine to apply patches, there is probably a local root exploit you could use to gain access. Basically go to http://www.securityfocus.com/vulnerabilities, pull down linux and kernel or your specific distribution and look for the local root exploits. They're not just going to show you how to do it, so if you didn't already know how to use an exploit you're not going to be able to easily. Better solution is to go get physical access and use a livecd as others mentioned. - Taxman Talk 18:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Boot from a rescue CD which gives you write access to the boot partition with root access. If you don't have a suitable CD, then take out the hard disk and mount it in another Linux box. On a Linux box where you know the root password, look at /etc/passwd or /etc/shadow (depending on your configuration) and note the encrypted version of your password there. Then edit the passwd or shadow file on the disk of the system you've forgotten the password for. You now have a known password on that system.-gadfium 08:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I think the slackware install CD will give write access, if not I know I've got knopix around here somewhere. I do have another box where I know the root password. So what you're saying is if I edit /etc/shadow on the box I'm locked out of so that root has the same hash as the box I can get into that should fix it? That makes sense if I'm understanding you right.--◀Pucktalk▶ 08:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
One other thought: are you trying to login as root at the console? It is likely to be forbidden from remote sessions. It's easy to mistake this symptom as "forgotten password". Notinasnaid 10:25, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I vaguely recall that when remote root is disabled you get an message saying so. I rarely disable remote root becuase the boxes are inaccessable to the outside world unless you can get through two NAT boxes. Anyway, I'm logged in as my regular user and trying to su. I've most definitely forgotten the password.--◀Pucktalk▶ 10:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
For completeness, if the box is running old software for which there are local root exploits, you could use that root exploit to get root and reset the password. Note that if you can exploit it, so can anybody else with shell access to the box (or can use a remote exploit to execute that command as an unprivileged user), so fix the hole after you use it. --Robert Merkel 12:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Forgot my user password on Windows XP Professional

On my desktop, I forgot my user password, and the hint word doesn't make any sense to me any more. How can I get into my account again? deeptrivia (talk) 05:22, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Take it to a computer repair place, and tell them. That's the easiest way. -- User:Mac Davis
Yeah, it is, but if you have to do it often, such as when supporting people who can't understand how to use ntpasswd, using it works like a charm every time. It's probably what the guys at the repair place will use. I just wish I had the same thing for my Linux box.--◀Pucktalk▶ 07:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
For Linux, just stick in a Knoppix CD, mount your normal root partition and edit /etc/shadow under it. The install CD for your distro probably also works, you just need to get into a shell somehow (try Ctrl-Alt-F2). —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 12:42, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, that was informative. I'll check ntpasswd out! deeptrivia (talk) 22:31, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Movement of the Earth

Earth has a bit of information under the subheading Earth in the solar system and there is also some information at Planetary orbit.--Ali K 07:57, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

And don't forget precession. StuRat 22:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] seeking widest possible concensus

I'm seeking a concensus on the subject of mergers at eumetazoa. TheLimbicOne(talk) 14:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] shadows caused by albedo

I was wondering if there is a specific term for the shadow created from a reflective body such as the moon. In a sense, we know something is a shadow from a "direct" source of light whether it be natural(the sun) or artificial(a light bulb) but as far as these producing the light to something else and then this specific body reflecting the light: shouldn't there be a different term?

Your input would be much appreciated. I've been pondering this thought for some time now.

Sincerely,

Christopher Cole Chardon, Ohio

Now you've done it. I'm going to have "Moonshadow" playing in my head all day. Well, at least it's not "My Sharona". --Trovatore 15:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
It took me a long time to understand the question, but I suppose you simply mean "What should one call a shadow that is cast by reflected light?" I don't see why there should be a different term and anyway, most light we see is reflected. Consider what what shadows would be like if the Sun's light weren't reflected all over the place by the atmosphere (or whatever). They would be totally absolutely completely pitchblack. Most of the light around us is reflected light. And I imagine that light that is created in the Sun gets reflected many times there, too, so even our main source of light is mostly reflection (don'\t know this, just seems plausible). DirkvdM 11:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS CURE

(no text in body of question)

  • Please read the instructions at the top of the page and try again. - Mgm|(talk) 19:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't believe there is a cure, just ways to treat it. Aspirin, for example, relieves pain and reduces associated swelling. StuRat 22:40, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Right you are Stu'. At least in mainstream science anyhow. I'm sure there's plenty of pseudoscientists and plain ol' quacks out there who'll claim a cure just to make a buck (which is the real reason piriformis syndrome is also known as fat wallet syndrome). ;-) Mattopaedia 10:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] element lead

what is the melting point of the element lead?

  • I added a few square brackets to your question. Does that help? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 22:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
(If you're confused, that means "click on the lead link".) --AySz88^-^ 04:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] amphibians

...are animals that live in the water and on land. What else would you like to know? -User:Lommer | talk 22:52, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Energy Conservation 2

If a virtual particle appears in a vacuum, hits another particle, losing energy, and bounces off into it antiparticle, then then wouldn't energy conservation be violated because it has lost some of the borrowed energy? Thanks 216.209.153.49 23:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC) Max

If you look above, to here, the question has already been answered. GeeJo (t) (c) • 23:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
It's the same guy. -lethe talk 23:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I answered above. -lethe talk 01:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Universal IDs

Greetings:

I'm trying to find material relating to the concept of "Universal ID", which, in my case, is defined using the following scenario:

" A group of government officials and information managers at major corporations who point out that the proliferation of single-use identifying keys for individuals is causing major inefficiency, embarrassing and costly cases of mistaken identity, and considerable waste of time and money. They propose a single lifetime ID for every Canadian resident that would be used for everything from tax returns to grocery check-cashing cards."

And I have to argue along the lines of:

"a universal ID would lead to loss of privacy and essential freedoms, and would be open to considerable abuse."

I would highly appreciate any pointers to wikipedia entries, books, journal articles, web site materials pertaining to "universal ID" in the above sense.

Regards,

129.97.252.63 23:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I believe Identity card is what youre looking for, but I don't think it examines the Canadian case in great detail. GeeJo (t) (c) • 23:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure how much they've written about this topic in particular, but the folks at the [Cato Institute] would certainly have something opposing it. Similarly, you might want to search [Reason Magazine]. --George 14:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 5

[edit] Lungs

How do the lungs Work?

Perhaps you didn't realize this is an encyclopedia. Have you tried looking up lung? -- Rick Block (talk) 00:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oxygen Planet

Ok, in theory if i took a planet the size of earth same atmospherical structure but 100% oxygen consistency, landed on this planet (with a suit) and lighted a match, would the planet exploded? I have been told 'No' by various sources, why not?

And as another interesting point when I light a match on Earth why doesn't 20% or so of the earth atmosphere explode? (7121989 00:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC))

Oxygen alone isn't an optimal fuel for an explosion. Oxygen atoms will combine with other oxygen atoms to create 02. When you heat up the O2 to break it apart and force it to combine with another oxygen atom, you don't get much heat surplus. Now, if you use a molecule that is a little unstable, provide it with something it wants (usually oxygen), and then add heat to give it a nudge, the molecule will break, release a lot of heat, and the halves will combine with the oxygen. So, all in all, you really need fuel, heat, and oxygen to get something good going. Consider going to a planet that has an atmosphere of well mixed 50% oxygen and 50% methane - then light a match. Of course, I doubt you'd ever get the chance since some flaming meteorite will beat you to it. --Kainaw (talk) 00:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course the planet's surface might also be flammable, but then the same would apply - a meteor would probably have beaten you to it. Other than that there are two (potential) fuel sources. First there is the match, which will burn up incredibly fast - you'll see small 'poof' and then nothing. The second source is you. Better make that a very non-combustible suit or the little 'poof' will be followed by a somewhat bigger one... DirkvdM 11:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course, the heat of atmospheric entry would have blown the entire place up even if a meteor hadn't wandered along yet. 198.62.217.2 13:11, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Or lightning. Eek. Bethefawn 2206, 6.1.06

[edit] A new form of fire?

What other examples are there of fire, in the sense of rather than rapid oxidisation, an exothermic reaction with another element or compound?

With these examples could one make a new type of more efficient combustion which can remain more prolonged?

Or, just came up with this the other extreme, cold fire, an rapid endothermic reaction which emits cold as it sucks in lights and sinks to the ground like a really cold dark heavy smoke, is it possible to be created? (7121989 00:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC))

Similar to the question above, your question is limited to oxygen combustion. There is nuclear fusion and fission also - neither of which requires oxygen and both are capable of being prolonged for very long times. However, I cannot think of any chain reaction that absorbs energy. You might try to call a black hole a chain reaction that absorbs energy, but I'd say you are being very liberal with the idea of a chain reaction. --Kainaw (talk) 01:01, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
There really can't be any other form, since that is the definition of fire. An endothermic reaction like your "cold fire" is not self sustaining and won't have the power to suck in light, something that only black holes can do. Matter can absorb light or heat that hits it directly, but won't "suck it in." There's no such thing as emitting cold, since cold is a lack of heat. An endothermic reaction like the one inside a chemical cold pack will absorb heat from the environment, but it won't necessarily be dark, nor will it exist in the form of smoke or have a particular density. Night Gyr 01:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Rust is oxidation of iron. Is it exothermic? User:Zoe|(talk) 16:41, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I believe it is, but it happens at such a slow rate that the temperature difference generated is negligable. -User:Lommer | talk 17:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, and reversing rusting is endothermic - I can't remember the chemical, but I did it in chemistry class and the beaker happened to turn cold. I can't remember if it was an acid (most likely not, because it simply just allows it to slide off, it doesn't reverse the reaction as more just excise the rusted parts). Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 10:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Most expensive chemical element and compund

What is the most expensive chemical element and compound by market price currently? and i have also heard ridiculous prices on antimatter, but has it ever been made, surely none exists now? (7121989 01:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC))

Bear in mind, the most expensive elements are all only available in very, very small quantities, usually as the result of high-energy collisions in particle accelerators, and aren't feasibly producable in reasonable quantities. As such, any cost-figure attached to elements are simply scaled up from the cost per atom. Because of this, any element of about 110+ is going to be hideously, mind-bogglingly expensive. As for antimatter, yep, it's been produced. It's used in PET scans among other things, though again, only on the order of a relative handful of particles. GeeJo (t) (c) • 04:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
What's the most expensive stable element? Common Man 03:04, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Cesium, probably. Of course, "stable" can be a tad subjective (of course, I'm just playing with semantics here) - protons eventually do decay. ;-) Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 20:01, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Cesium, are you sure? I would have thought that I would have been Platinum. --KILO-LIMA 18:41, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Cesium seems more rare than platinum. Would have thought francium, if not for its radioactivity. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 02:40, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] lizard regeneration

Is it possible for a new lizard to grow from a piece of tail broken off an original? I know that it can grow a new tail if it loses one, but can one grow from the piece that has fallen off?

Salamanders are better than lizards at leg regeneration. The "fallen off piece" does not grow a new salamander. For an up-to-the-minute review of limb regeneration and how some of our new understanding may be applied to human organ regeneration, see this week's issue of Science: [21] alteripse 02:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

While lizards can't do that, note that planaria, a type of flatworm, can do so. StuRat 10:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, the Crown-of-Thorns starfish, a major blight on Australian reefs, can do this. The method of population control used was to hack them to bits and throw the bits into the ocean, an unfortunately each of the little bits grew into a new starfish, increasing the numbers dramatically. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 15:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
The secret of regeneration in general is in the cells' genetic programming: they have to learn to recognise certain chemical signals in order to grow again, trigerring off a complex biochemical pathway (as it does in germination), or develop into a new stage (often they are all intermediary) - often mature, specialised cells in humans can't do that, either that, or we don't know the signals yet. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 10:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Some trees can also do that trick. You can grow a willow tree from a larger willow branch. – b_jonas 15:52, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
It's vegetative reproduction, but they have stem cells in (unsurprisingly) the stem, and plant structure is less interdependent on one another and less complex than animal structure, so thus it's not that kind regeneration in that perspective though. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 06:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Earths location

Lets say the Earth was 1 foot closer to the sun as it is now...how much would that affect the climate here in Earth?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.117.16.64 (talk • contribs) 2006-01-05 05:32:13 (UTC).

None.--◀Pucktalk▶ 05:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Go outside and stand in the sun. Then get a stool and stand on that a foot higher. Any difference? The Earth's orbit wobbles a bit and has been speculated to cause changes in climate, e.g. the ice ages, but that's likely to be more than a foot. enochlau (talk) 05:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Interesting question. The Earths orbit is elliptical so as it goes round the sun at certain times of the year it is closer than at other times. The 1 foot you mention is a trivial difference. At its closest distance to the sun, perihelion, the Earth is 147 million km from the Sun. At its greatest distance, aphelion, it is 152 million km from the Sun. So there is a difference during the year of approximately 5 million km. The Earth is closest to the Sun in July January and furthest away in January July. David D. (Talk) 05:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually this year Earth was at closest, perihelion, on Jan 4 (yesterday), it will be farthermost away, aphelion, July 3.USNO Data.--◀Pucktalk▶ 06:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
To demonstrate how insignificant this difference would be, let's do some calculations. The amount of light which hits the Earth from the Sun is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. Since the average distance is around 93 million miles, this is about 491 billion feet. The difference in the squares of 491 billion feet and 490,999,999,999 feet is about 0.0000000004%, so it would change the Earth's temp by about that percentage. This would work out to around 0.000000002 degrees F. These calcs are very approximate, but give some idea of how insignificant the change would be. StuRat 10:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course the Earth's orbital period would have to decrease too, but even if there is an exponential relation between the two (how do they relate again?) then that would also be too minute a change.
But how much would the distance have to change for it to have any effect? And suppose global warming would really get out of control, could we use nuclear explosions (like in the tv series Space: 1999) to achieve this? And while we're at it, alter the rotational period too, so we get 100 or 1000 days per year, so timekeeping can be made nice and decimal too. :) DirkvdM 11:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
About the relations, I suspect you would need to use some elliptic equations in order to replot the new orbit after you've pushed it in by one foot. ;-) Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 10:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Use nukes to move the earth? No, no ... no. All of about 0% of an explosions energy (no matter how big) affects the momentum of the planet. The most effective way to move the planet would be to sling HUGE amounts of matter in the opposite direction, at high speed. A Moon-sized chunk should get you a few percent further out from the Sun, if you could get it faster than ~11km/s (escape velocity). And then you'd have to make sure its orbit won't ever intersect the Earth's new orbit, or KaPOW! Tzarius 23:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
In case one is wondering how the Earth can be closer to the Sun in winter, the answer is that the effect of Earth's axial tilt completely overwhelms any difference made by the varying distance. Plus, it's summer south of the equator. -- Cyrius|✎ 07:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Which would mean that the differences between summer and winter would be much greater in the southern hemisphere if it weren't for the fact that it's mostly ocean, which has a stabilising effect. I think. DirkvdM 10:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How to copy/paste wikipedia articles including images

To make a long story short, I would like to be able to copy and paste entire wikipedia articles (including text and images) onto my usb drive so that I can take those articles and view them on a different (offline) computer. When I select everything on a wikipedia article and copy and paste it into a microsoft word document, all I get is text, no images. If I individually select the pictures and copy/paste them it works fine, but that would take an extremely long time. How can I do this efficiently? (Please note that I have no intention whatsoever of using this for any illegal or immoral reasons) Flea110 06:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

If you're using IE, have you tried File --> Save As... ? The resulting files are somewhat messy and inefficient, but it might work, and it's fast and easy. --AySz88^-^ 06:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm actually using firefox, and I just tried using the 'save page as' function. I saved the page to the desktop, and when I opened that file (still on the first computer), the page was a little garbled (but certainly readable) and the pictures showed up fine. When I transferred the file to the offline computer, the text showed up fine, but the where the images should have been there were little red "x"s in the corners, and it displayed the text name of each image. Can anyone think of anything else? (thanks for trying, aysz88) Flea110 07:13, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
That's because IE bundles the html file, the css file (if present), the image files, and possibly other used files into one file on your harddrive (a .mht file, multipart html file). So when you copy it to the other computer, everything works fine. Firefox, unfortunately, DOESN'T do it. It puts all files except the HTML file in a separate folder next to the HTML file. If you want to transfer it to another computer after that you'll have to copy both the HTML file and the folder. It's a pity really - the MHT feature is one of the few REALLY GOOD features of IE, I think. There seems to be a Firefox extension to fix the problem and add the feature to FF though, but I haven't tested it. TERdON 21:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I actually just received the answer to this question from a friend via msn messenger. In case anybody else is wondering, here's how it's done. File--> Save As, (be sure 'web page, complete' is selected) and save it DIRECTLY to the usb drive. It works fine then. aysz88, you were right after all, but my mistake at the time was not saving it DIRECTLY to the usb drive. Ahh.. Feels so good to solve a problem. Flea110 07:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Glad you got the answer to your problem. :) --AySz88^-^ 07:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
An alternative would be to use HTTrack, a very powerful tool (so be careful what you do). It will not only download the page but also all the pages it links to. In case of Wikipedia this would download the whole site because everything is ultimately interlinked. Actually, without restraints, it would download the entire internet. To only get the pics you can limit the linkdepth to one and specify only image links (or something similar - I haven't used it for a long time). DirkvdM 11:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] astrology

Is the prediction by astrology correct? Is the basis of astrology is firm?

Answer to first question is sometimes. Answer to second is no. David D. (Talk) 07:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
The predictions seem correct because typically a horoscope contains four or five vague "predictions" (You will meet a stranger, you will face challenges today). According to probability, at least one of these should come true in some way, and since people want to believe the horoscope, they will see minor coincidences as fulfillment of the prophecy. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 08:16, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Let's define our terms here. Without necessarily wanting to add credence to astrology, there is a huge difference between the "astrology" advice columns in the daily newspapers which use Sun signs only, that apply to 1/12 of the entire population; and a serious natal chart drawn and interpreted by a professional astrologer that uses an individual's precise birth data and which applies to that person alone. The latter is astrology (whether you think it has any validity or not), the former is not. JackofOz 08:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
And I stand by my answer above. Smurrayinchester is correct when he says that people want to see it work and will shoe horn the predictions into known events or cherry pick their character traits to fit. For those with a less cynical view I suspect it is often self fulfilling (obviously this is a POV comment). In this sense it may be comforting and even positive with regard to ones life. David D. (Talk) 08:41, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I wouldn't dispute any of that. I'm just saying that, mostly, what people think of as "astrology" is a misnomer, it's something that has virtually no relevance to true astrology at all. JackofOz 08:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, maybe it was not clear, i agree with your comments. May be I am missing this too. I thought the astrologers were all about prediciting character and to a certain extent fate. Certainly I would not call the daily horoscopes astrology, although i thought they did 'pretend' to make some similar statements but there is just no method i.e. fiction David D. (Talk) 09:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Also note that the "theory" behind astrology, if it can be called that, is based on the actions of Greek and Roman gods. If you don't believe in Roman gods, like Mars/Ares, you shouldn't believe that people born when Mars is visible will have the traits of that god (combative, for example). There is a basic incompatibility in believing in Christianity or any other modern religion and also believing in astrology. There is also a basic incompatibility in believing in science and astrology. StuRat 10:22, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

This is not true at all. Astrology was never so limited and many Christians (and scientists) were astrologers throughout the early modern period. Our history of astrology does a fairly good job of outlining that. A belief in astrology does not necessitate a belief in Roman or Greek mythology, it simply requires the believe that "heavenly bodies" could have influences on individual people. The place where astrology and Christianity usually butted heads was the issue of free will, not in gods. --Fastfission 03:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

See Forer effect. --Robert Merkel 12:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

This question is well up for debate. People may consider it the best thing since sliced bread, other may not. --KILO-LIMA 18:43, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] dandruff

how to cure dandruff

Read the article Dandruff. There's a section on Treatment. --Canley 09:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] agriculture

How can science help agricultutre?--~~how science can help agriculture?--219.94.50.118 10:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Is this, by any chance, homework? Notinasnaid 11:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Must be a very important question, because (s)he asks it twice. DirkvdM 11:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Here's a hint to start you off when you do your own homework: agricultural science. --Robert Merkel 12:48, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] computers

what is an operating system? who is considered the father of modern computers?

See Operating system. As for the father of modern computers, depends on what you call a modern computer and whether you're thinking about hardware or software. Blaise Pascal and Charles Babbage constructed mechanical computers. Ada Lovelace is said to be the first programmer (in which it would be a 'mother' - you male chauvinist pig :) ). If by 'modern computer' you mean the use of transistors then it could be Julius Edgar Lilienfeld (funny, I thought the transistor was a British invention 'stolen' by the Japanese). If you mean the third generation computers, with integrated circuits, then it would be Jack Kilby. See also History of computing hardware. DirkvdM 12:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Some other luminaries include Alan Turing, who in large part founded computer science, Claude Shannon, who developed digital circuits, J. Presper Eckhart and John William Mauchly for the ENIAC and the design of the stored program computer, John von Neumann for writing up Eckhart and Mauchly's work and circulating it, and Konrad Zuse, for apparently doing most of this independently in Germany before the collapse of Nazi Germany interrupted his work. But the modern computer was the product of many people developing a lot of technologies and figuring out how to combine them, working in collaboration and sometimes in competition, and it's simply impossible to assign one person credit for it all. --Robert Merkel 12:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Thus I have read: "The Atanasoff-Berry Computer was the world's first electronic digital computer. It was built by John Vincent Atanasoff and Clifford Berry at Iowa State University during 1937-42." This would be without transitors. Tubes and/or relays , I guess. see http://www.cs.iastate.edu/jva/jva-archive.shtml John Atanasoff --GangofOne 00:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, you can Atanasoff to the list, but the ABC wasn't a modern "computer" as we would understand it. It was a major development that pioneered a number of key features of modern computers, but it was a special-purpose machine as distinct from the later ENIAC and the von Neumann machines that followed it. --Robert Merkel 03:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pure copper 3,000 yrs ago

What procedure would people in the bronze age have used to produce pure copper from copper oxide?

From about 5000BC, smelting, usually charcoal-fuelled, was used to process the ores into pure copper. GeeJo (t) (c) • 13:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Particle accelerators

Hi just wondring if anyone could help me on this. How has the UNILAC accelerator been used to increase our knowledge about chemical elements? How does the technique work and how does it rely on an understanding of the structure of atoms? Thanks

Why is science such important in our daily life?

See the articles UNILAC, Linear particle accelerator and Science. --Canley 22:12, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eye Strain

Is it possible to strain your eyes by reading or watching tv with little or almost no light? It is an old wive's tale that I would like to know the rationality and/or proof behind. Any help will be greatly appreciated! -- Chloe

How Stuff Works has a pretty good explanation on the subject. GeeJo (t) (c) • 14:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! That was very helpful! any other sources are still greatly appreciated. -- Chloe

That article was about reading in low light. Reading is done at close range, which means it requires your eyes' focusing muscles to work harder. (Unfortunately, the article "Accommodation (eye)" is a stub.) Watching TV, you're not sitting so close to the screen, so this is less of an issue. (And at a movie theater you're even farther from the screen and your eyes are practically focused at infinity, so being in the dark matters even less.) -- Anonymous, 21:20 UTC, January 5.
Also, the brightness on the TV should be adjusted to match the brightness of the room. A dim TV in a bright room causes as much eye strain as a bright TV in a dim room. StuRat 22:13, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speed of a horse

How fast can the average horse run? --163.153.132.5 14:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

For a sprint (100 yards)? Or for miles? Notinasnaid 16:15, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't know much about horses, but the fastest horse in the Melbourne Cup last year ran 3200 m (10 500 ft) in 3m 19 sec. That's an average speed of 58 km/h (36 mi/h). Average horses must be a bit slower than that.--Commander Keane 23:15, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
According to a quick google search(animals speed):
  • A normal 'quarter horse' can run 47.50mph (top speed) for a quarter mile
  • A ridden horse can go 40mph
  • The distance record for a horse may be 100 miles in 9 hours
Also, it turns out lots of people use the exact same chart of animal speeds. Black Carrot 02:56, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I've read in a book that a gallopping horse goes 43 km/h. – b_jonas 15:45, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Teaching myself Geology

I am teaching myself geology for a course and i am looking through some old exams, some help please i am lost on this q. What name is given to the process which causes surface layer rock to break off? --15:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe you; you're eroding people's patience. Proto t c 15:48, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I believe we can weather it. Weathering = breaking up of rock into smaller particles. Erosion = movement of those particles from one area to another. This should be in even the most basic geology/Earth science texts. TheSPY 15:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)TheSPY
Have a look at weathering - Adrian Pingstone 20:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] erasables( computer storage devices)

RAM / ROM ? Tzarius 22:49, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Or WOM of course :) GeeJo (t) (c) • 02:28, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] astatine

How many protrons does the element Astatine have? How many nuetrons does the element Astatine have? Thank you Amy T207.118.208.184 23:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

From Astatine: The atomic number gives you the number of protons in an atom; in this case it's 85. The atomic mass gives you the total number of protons and neutrons; in this case it's 210. To find the number of neutrons, subtract 85 from 210. Sometimes there are many common isotopes of the element, in which case the number of neutrons would vary; in this case, it looks like there's only one common isotope. enochlau (talk) 23:41, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

How many electrons does the element astatine have? Thank you Amy T207.118.208.184 23:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

As many as it has protons. (Unless it's ionized, in which case it may have more or less.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 01:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 6

[edit] Size of internet, size of wikipedia

If you were able to download the entire internet, how much space would it take up on a (rediculously massive) hard drive? How about if you were able to download all of wikipedia? Flea110 01:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't know about the entire Internet, but for Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Database download. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 01:34, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I thought wikipedia was the whole thing. -lethe talk 02:28, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Wow, it's mindboggling! deeptrivia (talk) 02:34, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
The Internet Archive Wayback Machine is about 1 petabyte in size and is growing at a rate or 20 terabytes a month according to its FAQ [22] (compaired to a mere 40 gigs for a wikipedia database dump). The Wayback is presumably larger than the internet because it includes multiple versions of each site. Then again, because its all accessable online its really part of the internet itself, making the actual size of the internet somewhat larger. If you were to include the size of all such caches, including search engine indexes, not to mention material available through filesharing networks and Bittorent, and twenty-some years of newsgroups, the number quickly becomes astronomically large.
Or for a more succinct response, a quick googling yields this...[23]. Jasongetsdown 03:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Since 1 GB of hard disk space costs about half a € storing Wikipedia would cost about 8 €. Storing the Internet would however cost half a million €. DirkvdM 08:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
New Scientist found a website which offered the entire web for download at 22.2877482 petabytes, or 23 931 287 382 megabytes [24]. Trying to download it however resulted in "Insufficient memory on drive C: for the internet. Insert disc in drive A". smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 17:02, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
LOL. DirkvdM 10:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Don't forget that the internet is much bigger than just the web. While the web may have lots of web sites and images on it, the internet at any moment has a whole lot of other bytes flying around, including emails, IMs, P2P traffic, etc. That is to say that the more-static web is a tiny fraction of the more-dynamic internet. I recall hearing an ISP study that showed that WWW (web) traffic was actually less than 20% of their traffic. --Quasipalm 19:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
And of course you couldn't (or else shouldn't :) ) download other people's emails. DirkvdM 10:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Digital cable to DVD Recorder

Can i hook a Wireless Transmitter to my Digital Cable and then hook my wireless receiver to my DVD recorder to record things from Digital Cable?

Generally, no, because digital TV is always encrypted to stop people accessing channels they do not pay for. This has the side effect that you can't get the raw digital video feed out of the set top box. See Television encryption for more details on this. You can attach a TiVo type device to a digital TV box because it uses an analog interlink. So, you could build a device that takes an analog signal from your digital cable box, re-encodes it as a compressed digital video stream, sends it to a computer which has a DVD burner in it, and then burn it to that. But this would be quite a significant feat of DIY home engineering ;) If you want to record programs from your digital cable box, a PVR like TiVo is still the best way to do it, alternatively I think some home DVD recorder devices can be connected directly to your box like VCR tape recorders could be. Hope that helps -- Anonymous Guy

I can record from my Digital Cable to my DVD Recorder. It's not a trick. My Wireless transmitter/Reciever does the trick. It's not scrambled or Encrypted!

[edit] NSAIDs for dogs

My dog is taking an NSAID called carprofen (no article yet). Why shouldn't dogs take human NSAIDs like aspirin or ibuprofen? Why shouldn't people take carprofen? —Keenan Pepper 02:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

All I can tell you is what a Google search turns up, so take it with a grain of salt. Carprofen has apparently gone through some human trials in Europe, but was never put on the market for economic reasons. Dogs can be given aspirin, but the toxic doses are relatively low and ulcers are likely. Veterinary aspirin is available. Ibuprofen causes stomach ulcers far more readily in dogs than in humans. -- Cyrius|✎ 07:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
This is also the same for chocolate: It is highly poisonous to dogs! --KILO-LIMA 18:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Free circuit simulator software

I'm looking for a compreensive circuit simulator that can manage things like spark gaps, flyback transformers, an arbitrary number of inductive couplings, etc. I found a nifty one in Java but it doesn't support flyback circuits, and the controls are rather annoying to deal with. The program I'm looking should run on Windows XP.

Anyone knows of such a thing? ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 03:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Do a google search for SPICE. There are several free versions. 65.96.191.29 10:36, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] blogs

Blogs? Wouldn't that be better on the humanities reference desk? ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯

[edit] Would my ISP be able to know what websites I visit

Would my ISP be able to know what websites I visit? I am in a very small town and there are only two companies offering services here. One ia a big telecom company which I at present use. But, the other company is a new, small and a local company which has given some 50 connections in my town. I plan to move to the small ISP because it is cheap. But, I am afraid whether they would be able to see what websites I visit. Can anyone please tell me? Do you have any other advice or tips?

  • Yes, they could, but they probably won't unless you get involved in something which would result in the police requesting the information from them. If they got a website, try reading their Privacy Policy. If I remember correctly, employees are not allowed to look up such info unless there's good reason to. - 131.211.210.11 08:24, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Your ISP can potentially see everything you do (except when visiting secure web sites, where they can see where you go, but not what you type). Your e-mails too. In some places they may be allowed to record this information. In some places they may be required to do this, in case the police later want to investigate something. The solution is to not visit illegal sites, I guess. Notinasnaid 10:14, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • on a side note visiting certian websites will probably get you put on an FBI watchlist, doesn't take much these days, certianly wikipedia users are all on such a list, very subversive website, grounds for concern--172.174.71.47 14:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Heck using the phrase 'FBI watchlist' on the internet is probably enough to get you on such a list--172.174.71.47 14:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • We've got our Eye on you. And you. - Taxman Talk 16:36, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
How do you know if a site is 'illegal' before you visit it? And whose law determines what is illegal on an international medium? DirkvdM 10:19, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

You could also get an encrypted connection to a proxy service and use some sort of onion routing or freenet type thing from there. Not perfect, but does make it hard to tell where you are visiting. - Taxman Talk 16:38, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest Tor, being widely supported free / open software. No proprietary protocols or single business in control. Tzarius 06:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

These rules might also vary by nation. Depending on how you connect to the Internet, a bunch of other people in addition to your ISP might know all about what you doing. Even though secured websites are protected from normal spying, they are not protected from keylogger spyware. User:AlMac|(talk) 07:06, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

About the privacy policy. Who guarantees that they stick to that? My ISP has the ability to follow my actions. Who has the ability to follow my ISP's actions? And would they be interrested in protecting my privacy (they'll probably be in the business of violating privacy themselves and without incentive thieves don't snitch on thieves, do they?) DirkvdM 10:19, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

There is as much privacy on the internet as there is privacy in taking out a classified ad in a newspaper. Why do you think the United States Department of Defence agency DARPA invented the internet in the first place? ECHELON needed help. WAS 4.250 02:28, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Electrophysiology

I am an electronics engg student. My interest is to study about a subject that links electronics with biology or rather human physiology. Is it apt for me to do my higher studies in "ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY"? If yes plz let me know about the books i've to refer to and the universities in the U.S.A and the U.K. which offer this course. --210.214.157.86 09:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

UCAS, who have a list of all the courses available in the UK, don't recognise "Electrophysiology". However, they do have several courses for cybernetics: [25]. Doubtless the US has similar. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 17:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
A quick read of our article on electrophysiology might also help. At UCLA we had an undergraduate program in biomedical engineering which sounds like it may be of interest to you. I'm sure there are other schools with similar degree programs as well [26]. --David Iberri (talk) 22:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] aromol?

Can someone Please tell me what Aromol is? It is in Smith's Rosebud Salve and I want to know what it is? I have looked everwhere and can't find anything on it? So please someone help me, what is Aromol? Thanks

You could always try contacting the manufacturer and asking them. --Anonymous, 10:00 UTC, January 6, 2006

[edit] optics - experiment

how to make an achromatic doublet ? mail answer to : [email removed]

It's pretty much summed up by this diagram: Image:Lens6b.png
Flint glass and crown glass can be replaced by any two materials with different dispersion. —Keenan Pepper 13:35, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Also, if you look at our chromatic aberration article, you will see how to calculate the focal lengths of each part of the lens you need, if you know some data about the materials. --Bob Mellish 16:11, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] viral/ infectious diseases

Are there any viruses, bacteria, etc., that live in the cold weather? I know that the cold weather just weakens the immune system and makes the body more succeptible to infection, but i was just wondering whether or not there are any viruses that actually just live in the cold environments and are strong enough to infect people. Thanks! ----- Eryn

Short answer: yes. Long answer is more complicated. There are bacteria and viruses that thrive in extreme environments: freezing and boiling hot environments, but these rarely affect (or infect) humans. Shall we assume that you are only interested in bacteria and viruses that can cause human disease and the degree of cold is the winter temperature range away from the poles where most of us live (like down to 10 degrees below water freezing)? Moderate freezing cold will kill many bacteria and some viruses, but the main effect of cold on bacteria is just to slow down reproduction and activity (which is why refrigeration retards bacterial growth). Bacteria and viruses vary greatly in their abilities to survive outside a host but the temperature is less of a factor in this than availability of water and food and absence of harmful substances like soap or high osmolality or intense sunlight. Dehydration will kill most bacteria faster than cold will, but some viruses can survive dehydration and some can survive indefinitely being frozen. Some pathogenic bacteria require direct person-to-person contact (e.g., bacteria of gonorrhea or the AIDS virus), but others (e.g., the spores of tetanus) can survive in the environment for long periods of time in various forms. For example, there has been concern about whether smallpox or influenza viruses can remain infectious in graves. The most recent example was the investigation a few years ago of 1919 flu victims buried in the permafrost of extreme northern arctic islands for 80 years. Precautions were taken to avoid releasing potentially infectious material. That said, I don't know of any cases of smallpox or plague or influenza known to have been contracted from graves or crypts. Cold weather does have an effect on transmissibility of respiratory viruses by affecting human behavior and perhaps altering mucous membrane defenses. Complex topic. alteripse 13:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks... I know this is a complicated question. You were very helpful. However, are there any specific instances in which entering a cold environment would promote the spread and possible contraction of a virus or bacteria into a human body? And if so, what are they???? ----- Eryn

Ah, this sounds simple, so I'll wade in. This site [27] explains the #1 myth, ie. if you go outside 'You'll catch your death of cold!', which is usually uttered by an old lady in a Jane Austen novel. --Zeizmic 18:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I think i worded my second question poorly though. Are there any bacteria, viruses, etc., that live only in the cold weather and are then contrsacted by humans or animals? For example, a virus taht lives and thrives outdoors in cool temperatures and then infects the first host that it encounters. possibly this bacteria/virus stayes dormant until contact with a host is made.... (Maybe this has been answered already in a previous reply and i just dont see it.) But if there is such a virus/bacteria, a name or description would be most helpful. Thanks! ----- Eryn

I asked our disease control doctor here (MUSC hospital). She said that there are many bacteria and viral-like lifeforms documented in the South Pole. In her opinion, it is heat that is harmful to them, not cold. They usually freeze and thaw well. They overheat and die easily - which is why running a fever is a good thing. --Kainaw (talk) 20:39, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!! This last piece of information is exactly what i was looking for. Thank you so much for everything. -----Eryn

[edit] Physicists

Hi, I read in several places that the fundamental building block of the universe is information or events...I know how it sounds, but I haven't read it in new agey looney pages, I read it in like, news articles, and in some physics pages which I cannot remember,but I can't distinguish real science from far fetched claims...so, do you think this is true or somewhat true? because I am aware that the building blocks of matter are quarks and subatomic particles like gluons and stuff.

also, quite apart from that, here's this quote :We are now synergetically forced to conclude that all phenomena are metaphysical; wherefore, as many have long suspected — like it or not — 'life is but a dream.' - Buckminster Fuller. see? I mean, stuff like this... what do u think of what he says?, or am I taking it too litarally and he meant something else.--Cosmic girl 14:35, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I think, apart from subtle philosophical difference, information in this context can mean energy of which matter is another manifestation, and events can mean time. Space is left out, but again, some people think space it no existence independent of matter. I find this statement a bit vague though. deeptrivia (talk) 16:02, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Comment2: Well, I don't know the context, but he's probably referring to something related to the wave-particle duality and uncertainty principle. For more about the "life is a dream" proposition, see Advaita_Vedanta#Advaita_and_Science, Advaita_Vedanta#Three_levels_of_Truth, Advaita_Vedanta#Are_the_world_and_God_wholly_false.3F. deeptrivia (talk) 16:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


Thank u :), but what I actually meant to ask was if this notions are somewhat supported by current respectable science? or just by speculation, like eastern philosophies.--Cosmic girl 16:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, this wasn't intended as a reply, just some comments. Advaita_Vedanta#Advaita_and_Science should give an idea though of how far physicists entertain these views. deeptrivia (talk)
I've seen similar scientific speculations, in particular in the book Information - The New Language of Science by Hans Christian von Bayer. As I understand it, the basic idea is to think about a hypothetical perfect theory of everything -- what if you knew all the equations governing reality at the lowest level, and had all the data about everything (knew the full quantum wavefunctions etc), then you could imagine the whole universe evolving as a computational process -- in other words, we don't need to assume any reality beyond the information process. What I got from Bayer's book is that physicists are finding applications for information theory in physics, so that the physical information encoded in a system of particles may in fact have real physical meaning. The traditional basic connection is between entropy in statistical physics and information theory. But I'm no expert on any of this - I can't tell if these physicists have simply confused their models with reality. 84.239.128.9 19:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

cool, so you mean that, information theory implies that nothing outside or besides the universe is required for the universe to exist? I mean, nothing besides the information and computations of our universe?... if so, how can it know that? I mean, can't the universe be like a big videogame? it can seem the only thing for us, but we can never know that which lies outside the computer that contains it ... maybe we can only know the software... it sounds really crazy and hard to understand, but i think that the information theory has space for a videogame conception of reality, or a simulation for that matter, but I know nothing about physicists, so I need the expert's opinion. --Cosmic girl 19:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

The expert is just another character in the video game. But anyway, take a look at Edward Fredkin, Steven Wolfram; they attempt to show reality is a large computation in some machine. GangofOne 03:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I really suck at math and physics, but I believe that if everything is quantizied ( I'm sure I spelled that wrong :S )if everything is, I think the universe is no diferent than a videogame... but then, if it is, we can't know much about philosphy since the physics of the real universe (the one outside) aren't known to us...and maybe are even irrational to our brain...but that would surely signify there is a trickster God ...or a kid out there, haha --Cosmic girl 16:52, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

You should really check out interesting things like physical information and quantum entanglement. Information represents order: it can affect energy almost take on physical properties because of the laws of thermodynamics about things tending towards disorder. For example, destroying information in a hard drive, or in a computer processor, will result in a rise of entropy and therefore heat. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 20:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] who are the five google billionaires?

who are the five google billionaires?

Omid Kordestani, David Drummond, Shriram Kavitark Ram, Sergey Brin and Jonathan Rosenberg --Quasipalm 19:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A query regarding Pepper Pad

Have anyone of you used a Pepper pad? I am just interested in buying a pepper pad, but want to know this- I heard that its resolution is 800x600.

I just want to know how would a 8.4" screen placed horizontally compare with a screen placed vertically with respect to size. Would the 8.4" Pepper pad be equialant to a 15" CRT monitor in 800x600 resolution or would it be equivalent like viewing a 14" CRT screen? Or would it be equivalent to viewing some other screen with someother resolution? Can you please tell me the equivalents?

Can we view full page in a Pepper pad without sideways scrolling?

Thanks for making me look that up [28] That was really interesting! This seems to be the legendary Linux PDA that everybody has said will come one day. The resolution is good enough to get in most web pages without scrolling (just set your computer to this and see!). The specs look good, but you really need to get some independent reviews. Never be the first on the block! I find the info a bit misleading, since they seem to be marketing to the 'ipod' generation, with all sorts of promises, like browsing in your car. This thing only has Wifi which has a raft of access problems. There is no such thing as free broadband wireless (which is what they seem to be implying). My Blackberry costs $100 a month, for very slow Internet access. --Zeizmic 18:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] how does the cable car work?

Depending what you mean by cable car, see the links on this page. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 16:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is the pen mightier than the keyboard and mouse?

Which one do you feel is better of the following. A touchscreen pen? or a mouse with keyboard? Which do you think is the easier, and which one do you prefer if given a choice?

Personally, I'd go for the mouse and keyboard. Sum0 17:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Habit. I began using a keyboard in 1978. I didn't use a mouse until about 1992. So, to this day, I am more comfortable with a keyboard for 90% of my tasks and a mouse for simply moving windows around. If I were to have started with a mouse, I would probably use the mouse more. If I had started with a touchscreen pen, I'd probably use the touchscreen pen more. If I had started with a neural implant, I'd probably use the neural implant more. --Kainaw (talk) 19:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
The touchscreen pen seems to have the disadvantage that the weight of your arm is not supported, as it is with a mouse. Thus, after hours of use, your arm will get tired. StuRat 20:47, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
It depends on the application. For regular computing like editing Wikipedia, writing emails, browsing the internet, etc. I'm comfortable with a mouse and keyboard combo. But at my work a keyboard would just clutter things, so a touch screen is preferred. Dismas|(talk) 22:14, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I have a tablet PC... you can actually rest your arm on the screen with no problems, it's strong enough. For text entry, e.g. in my law lectures, I still find keyboard faster and more accurate. But in my maths lectures, I'll write with my stylus instead of writing on paper, because it's searchable. For other applications, I actually find that if there isn't much text entry (because handwriting is slow and inaccurate), using the stylus is far more natural, e.g. when casually browsing the net, or playing cards. enochlau (talk) 04:52, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
As said before, depends on the purpose. Generally, I prefer the keyboard over anything else (including the mouse) because it's easier on my mouse arm, much more versatile (try typing with a mouse :) )and much faster once you know the shortcuts (if any - which is the main reason I still prefer Photoshop over GIMP, even though that means rebooting to msWindows). I don't have a touchscreen but a tablet and I haven't gotten the hang of that yet, but that's a matter of what one's used to. I suppose it would be better for graphical stuff (using a mouse in a graphical application is the worst for my mouse-arm), but for quick notes and diagrams and such I still use old fashioned pen and paper. DirkvdM 12:02, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] how to teach newborn to swim?

Why would you want to? 198.62.217.2 17:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

This is actually common, 198. It can be a good idea for saftey reasons to introduce "swimming" at an early age. Read more here: [29] --Quasipalm 19:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
My older sister almost drowned quite a few times as a toddler before she was finally taught to swim. It seems she simply didn't know any better and walked off piers or into the deep ends of pools. Since then me and my three other siblings were all taught to swim as infants. None of us had any near-drownings, and we all love the water. Seems like a good reason to me.
As the the how, I've only seen it done in special classes. You usually first teach how to blow bubbles under water, and then when that comes naturally, you have one parent release the kid and another call them and they do the rest. — Laura Scudder ☎ 20:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Infants are surprisingly good at swimming in an controlled environment (after all they have been swimming for 9 months before). All you need to do is make sure they know to close their mouth and not breath for a little time, while underwater. Liz Barker's baby Dexter went to a swimming class long before he turned 1. - Mgm|(talk) 11:22, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Los Angeles-class submarine mast pattern

Does anyone know the story behind the giraffe-like black-and-white pattern on the masts of this photograph of a surfaced Los Angeles-class submarine? (In case that link doesn't work, it's the sixth picture on this page. Sum0 17:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I can't find an answer either, but if I had to guess, it's probably camouflage for when the sub is running just under the surface with its masts extended. -- Cyrius|✎ 02:54, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] deepest part on the planet

what is the deepest part on the planet below sea level?

The Mariana Trench Black Carrot 18:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Challenger Deep is the exact point. deeptrivia (talk) 01:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Earth's core. DirkvdM 12:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Finding Research Papers Online

I'm working on a project for science fair, and having some trouble tracking down the earlier research papers my sources cite. Google doesn't turn anything up, and I don't know many good search sites. How do professional scientist find papers? Black Carrot 18:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Try Google Scholar rather than just Google. Also, if you leave near a University or College, just pop in the library and ask what journals you should search. Most major universities have free access to journals as long as you're on a campus computer. Good luck. --Quasipalm 19:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. That's a start, but it doesn't have the papers I'm looking for, probably because they're a bit obscure and outside the mainstream. I'm using my project to test Rupert Sheldrake's experiments with 'the sense of being stared at'. Any other suggestions? Black Carrot 20:28, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

There is a psychology database similar to Medline and I think it includes parapsychology research. It will be available through most college or university libraries. Ask a librarian for help. The best starting point is often a paper that you do have, because the librarian can see how it is catalogued in the database and can then help you look for older but similar papers. There are a couple of American universities that have supported "paranormal" research, usually in association with the psychology dept, often under the name of parapsychology. You could call one of those depts and ask a secretary if a faculty member would be willing to talk to you once for an "interview to help with a school science project" and you might get lucky enough to get a few minutes of time. If so, ask their opinion of the research in that area and ask for suggestions on how to most efficiently find published research on the topic. They may be able to suggest specific journals, search terms or even authors to look for. Good luck. alteripse 20:53, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

You may also go directly to Rupert Sheldrake's books. He may describe his research there, or at least point you to more information in the notes. However, you may have trouble since often these sorts of pseudoscience authors take great care to hide their research from scrutiny. --Quasipalm 20:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

If your campus is subscribed, you'll also be able to use http://www.sciencedirect.com and http://www.engineeringvillage2.org. deeptrivia (talk) 23:35, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

You should check if your school or local library (etc.) subscribes to databases such as Thomson Gale Group or EBSCO host; These sites contain digital copies of articles from various scientific journals, some of which may be found as a hard copy in your library. If you live in a state such as Pennsylvania that has something similar to the AcessPA system, you can get access to these databases free with a library card. --Dragoon235 04:17, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] inventing a source of perpetual energy

How close are mankind from inventing a source of perpetual energy?

As close as we always were. As far as anyone knows, it's prohibited by the laws of physics. -- SCZenz 18:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
With one exception. The universe is believed to obey the law of conservation of energy. Therefore, the universe has a universal constant supply of energy. It never loses or gains any. It is just perpetually there. --Kainaw (talk) 19:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
It's a closed system, though. Doesn't count. Tzarius 06:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Though that doesnt stop people from trying. History of perpetual motion machines shows the various attempts at creating one. GeeJo (t) (c) • 19:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Of course, there are many energy sources that will last for billions of years, so are as good as perpetual, like hydro, solar, tidal, wave, wind, and geothermal energy. And while each chunk of fuel for a nuclear reactor may only last a few years, there is enough nuclear fuel to power the world virtually forever. Renewable sources, like wood, are also good forever if properly managed. Only fossil fuels will be "used up" someday soon, perhaps decades or centuries, that's not certain. StuRat 20:40, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

What if we were to figure out how to accelerate the transition from bio-waste into crude oil? Then, fossil fuels would also be a renewable energy source. We could keep pumping out those greenhouse gasses until we need a huge umbrella to cut down on solar heat. --Kainaw (talk) 20:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, you definitely can get methane from bacterial action on waste products, but I call this a "biofuel", not a "fossil fuel", to show it's source isn't "fossils". I don't know of any way to generate crude oil or coal from current waste products using bacteria, but I don't see why you would want to, as those forms both require refining and pollution controls while methane is ready to burn as is. StuRat 23:00, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

It's a bit more abstract, but the questioner might like to read Conservation of energy which states that energy is never created or destroyed, but is a constant. However, the Second law of thermodynamics states that the energy of an isolated system, while constant, is in a constant process of equalling out, meaning that the contained energy becomes more and more difficult to obtain in a general sense. --Quasipalm 20:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

While energy can theoretically be changed into mass according to E = mc2, this doesn't appear to happen anywhere on Earth. Energy seems to end up in the least usable form, which is heat. While usable energy can be generated from a heat differential, as in the case of geothermal energy, constant temperature heat is not a usable form of energy. StuRat 22:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Conversions from mass to energy do happen on Earth, but on a small scale; see Binding energy for example - in nuclear fusion/fission. enochlau (talk) 04:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Have to disagree. E = mc2 is true always and everywhere, in every energy transition. It tells the equivalence of mass and energy. What it doesn't tell you is how to do it, or even if there is a way to do it, just that IF you do it, this is what you get. If I burn a gram of gasoline I get 42 kilojoules. I compare the mass of the oxygen and gasoline that went in and the CO2 and H2O that came out, the numbers of atoms are exactly equal, but the products have a mass 4.6e-13 kg less than the reactants. 42 kJ = 4.6e-13 kg c^2 Just because 4.6e-13kg is too small for you to measure conveniently doesn't mean it isn't happening. -- GangofOne 07:08, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure what you mean. In combustion, the energy is not achieved through E = mc2; it comes from the formation of bonds in the CO2 and H2O. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 09:47, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
You say, in combustion the energy comes from the energy difference in the broken bonds and the reformed bonds, true, but it is still true that the rest masses of the reactants is greater than the rest masses of the products, and that mass difference is equal to the energy produced divided by c^2, regardless of the fact that this wasn't mentioned in chemistry class (because the mass is too small to measure). I encourage you to not let go of this question, ask around wikipedia, ask at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Physics . I will explain more if asked. One thing to think about: In a nuclear reaction, (which I assume you accept as an E=mc^2 process), it's the same thing-- breaking of one bond and forming others (except it's bonds of the strong force, whereas in chemistry it's electromagnetic forces.) GangofOne 12:57, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, chemical bonds affect mass, if I recall correctly. For example, the quarks that make up atomic nuclei are pretty light: it's the gluons that carry the nuclear forces and result in the sheer mass of the nucleus. The more stable something is, the less energy it needs in its bonds to make it stable, and therefore it weighs lighter than its component parts in a less stable state. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!)
If you don't mean 'eternal' too literally, the Sun. Almost all other energy sources are derivatives of solar energy. Plants get their energy from the Sun and animals from the plants, so all biofuel is solar energy. Fossil fuels are dead plants. Wind is caused by uneven solar heating of the atmosphere. And hydro-energy comes from water evaporated by the Sun. The only exceptions I can think of are tidal energy (caused by planetary movement) and geothermal energy. And of course nuclear energy, but that's also the source of the Sun's energy. DirkvdM 12:14, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, nuclear energy's source is ultimately Population III stars and Population II stars that formed before the sun - their immense mass would have formed the heavy metals like uranium et al in their dying stages. Which of course, some became unstable, resulting in fissionable material. Fission isn't the source of the sun's energy, anyway, but it was the product of stars. Geothermal energy (also aided by nuclear decay) is also due to star formation somewhat. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 09:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
As far as I know, there is research done with the ultimate purpose to make a power station operating on nuclear fusion. Such a power station would give much more energy cheaper than any energy source we currently have available. It would also eliminate the problem of digging nuclear waste as it doesn't produce any. So, in some sense, it would be "a source of perpetual energy" for some values of perpatual.
See fusion power and Timeline of nuclear fusion to see what state these researches are currently. – b_jonas 15:08, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] mining the moon

When mining the moon, what useful minerals would i find?

According to Moon, you will find uranium, thorium, potassium, oxygen, silicon, magnesium, iron, titanium, calcium, aluminium and hydrogen. It doesn't state the quantities of each. --Kainaw (talk) 20:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Also note that the cost of getting the minerals back to Earth would far exceed their value. StuRat 20:33, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

You're assuming that they actually want to get it down to the Earth though. If they have a mining operation in place, then with just a bit more money (What's a few billion more?) they could refine the minerals there and start a sustainable colony. Dismas|(talk) 00:16, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Then they would need to get oxygen and water (not to mention a smelting plant) up to the colony on the moon, which would be just as prohibitively expensive. StuRat 00:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Supposedly the most valuable thing (probably the only economically exportable good) to mine on the Moon is Helium-3.--Pharos 05:09, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, till we get a space elevator, that is. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 20:27, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Even so, the thing that makes mining practical on Earth is that geological (and sometimes biological) processes create local concentrations of useful materials that far exceed the global levels. The moon is geologically and biologically dead; as I understand it that moon rock is pretty much the same everywhere upon the moon. The only things worth mining (except for helium-3) might be any asteroids that have crashed into the moon - however, it might be easier in the future just to mine the asteroids in the asteroid belt directly.

[edit] Why does a pendulum work?

(no question)

A mass at one end the pendulum is pulled downard by gravity. It accelerates, but it redirected by a pivot point so that the momentum is going back upward. Gravity then pulls it down again. This repeats. A pendulum will eventually stop due to air resistance, friction in the rotation joint, and so on. By adding energy (like the big weights in a grandfather clock), you can keep a pendulum going. For more, see pendulum. --Kainaw (talk) 20:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
The characteristic of a pendulum which makes it ideal for time-keeping is that the period (amount of time for it to complete one full swing) is constant, even as the magnitude (distance of the full swing) reduces due to air resistance and friction. Thus, a pendulum can be used to measure time until it comes to a complete stop. StuRat 22:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I've always had trouble buying that. It seems like, if it takes a certain amount of time to get, say, from out horizontally to pointing at the floor (multiply by 4 for period), it will take less time to get from lower than horizontal to the floor. --Black Carrot 04:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
The Black Carrot is right to be suspicious; it's not actually quite true. (See the pendulum article for a look at the math, but it's not simple.) However, it is a very good approximation. If the pendulum starts out horizontally, its full weight is acting perpendicular to the string and this sets it in motion very fast. If it starts out near the bottom of the swing, its weight is almost parallel to the string, so the force on it is a lot less, and so is its speed. As it works out, the period is not exactly the same in the two cases, but it's very close to the same (especially for small angles).
Try it yourself. Take a ball of string and some tape. Unreel a few feet of string and tape the string to the ball where it comes off the ball. Tape the end of the string to the top of a doorframe. Set the ball to swinging just a couple of inches and time it for 10 swings back and forth. Then swing it up to a high angle, let it go, and time it again. I just did this and the times I got were between 19 and 20 seconds for 10 swings every time: my error in timing was probably larger than the difference between a long and a short swing. Of course, you will get different numbers according to how long you make the pendulum, but they will still agree with each other. (Because friction reduces the length of swing very fast with such a light pendulum, you might also try timing just 2 or 3 swings, but then the relative error of measurement is greater.)
In order for it to be accurately true that the period is fixed, the pendulum would have to follow a cycloidal path rather than a circular one: see tautochrone curve. However, this turns out not to be useful for practical clockmaking, because the mechanism necessary to do that introduces too much friction. Instead, pendulum clocks were designed so that the drive mechanism would keep the angle of the swing relatively small, and as constant as possible. For the really accurate pendulum clocks that astronomers used before electronics superseded them, very long pendulums were were used (like say 10 feet), but they would swing a very short distance (just a few inches).
--Anonymous, 05:45 UTC, January 7, 2006

[edit] Fooling credit score calculators

Is there any truth in Jaron Lanier's claim that people can and do arrange their finances in bizarre ways in order to get an improved credit score? ~~ N (t/c) 21:19, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

The rules seem to be sufficiently bizarre that such opportunities would present themselves. For example, a similarly bizarre policy by airlines of charging more for a one-way trip than the corresponding round-trip led to the technique of buying a round-trip ticket and only using the first half. StuRat 02:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neural Net Image Categorization

Most of the information I can find on neural nets is either very basic and general, or owned by a company and unavailable to outsiders. Where can I find information on the construction of neural nets that leans towards the conceptual (I only know Java, and don't have time to decipher other languages) and towards a large number of inputs, say on the order of millions? Black Carrot 21:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I hope you realize such a neural net will require massive computing power to run at a reasonable speed. Also, what is the application ? Fluid dynamics ? StuRat 22:38, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I do realize that it will take some work to apply it the way I'm hoping to, but I don't think it's impossible, and I'm certainly willing to try. There are worse ways to waste time. I especially hope to find ways, as you mention, to reduce the number of inputs to a more manageable level, but I don't think I can go below the tens of thousands. I'm trying to find a way to search the web for actual images. Google is great, but it only does keyword searches, and I would like to be able to do more than that. I'd like something that can sepearate a set of pictures into a Yes pile and a No pile accurately, such as Tree v Not Tree. Naturally, neural nets lept to mind. The structures I've found so far, however, don't lend themselves well to this. It's not that they can't be set to sort into the right piles, it's that you have to have the piles sorted in the first place for backpropagation to work, and then the setup is fairly rigid, not dealing well with cases outside its specific expertise, and not dealing too well with new cases being added. The ideal search, though, would involve a progressive narrowing down, and would anticipate related cases. I've come up with some things I haven't seen anyone write about that I think would help, but I think things would go a lot faster if I could find out what the people who've been working on this for years have thought of. Any suggestions are appreciated. Black Carrot 01:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Wow, that's quite an ambitious project. It sounds like the problems you are having are quite similar to those for voice recognition software. Specifically, the software can recognize the difference between "circumvent" and "circumnavigate" if programmed specifically for that task and adjusted for a given voice, but does a poor job of identifying a random word in a random voice. Also, such software needs to "learn" differences between similar words, which requires a great deal of user input to "train" it. I'm not even sure how you would define which picture is a tree and which is not, considering cases like a tree and a person, a tree branch, a tree sprout, a bush, a flower, etc.
I have thought of a much less ambitious search method, which could search for copies of an exact picture, possibly with a different scale. This could compare number of pixels of each color and look for a given ratio, as well as looking for colors to be in the same relative position on the pic. Complications such as mirror images, pics trimmed differently, non-uniform scaling, and different color balances would require quite a bit of coding to solve, but does seem doable. I've often found a pic via a web search which is just what I want as far as subject, but is too small. I would like a way to search for a full sized copy of the pic, even if the page doesn't contain the keywords I used in the initial picture search. Is that a project which would interest you ? StuRat 01:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
'Fraid not. I would expect that to be one of the functions of what I'm going for, but it's not by itself what I want. Besides, how many duplicate pictures are there floating around?
You see the problem pretty clearly. What I think I have to go for is something that, in its structure, mimics the way we see things. Not that it mimics the brain, that would be a waste of time and I don't have the background anyway. Here's how I see it. The integer inputs(from 0-255 in Java), form a massively multidimensional graph, at each point of which the output(a real number, ideally either 0 or 1) can be represented by a color, either red or blue, with black or white at the boundaries. Makes a nice, manageable picture, except for the countless thousands of unimaginable axes. I think 'phase space' is the technical name for things like this. Now, the most basic form of neural net (sans sigmoid) will draw a beautiful diagonal gradient, which is useless to me. A single-layer network that makes use of the sigmoid function will have a straight line(plane, hyperplane, however many dimensions) between one clear area of blue and one clear area of red, at any slant and position you want. Good start. A two-layer one will draw as many of those as you want(with colors strengthening each other where they overlap), then shove all the outputs above a certain value to one color, and all the ones below it to another, and you have a shape on the graph, most any basic shape you want. Great. Add another layer, and you can have a bunch of shapes scattered across the graph, making it nice and flexible. Now, within those shapes the output will be 0(No), and beyond them it will be 1(Yes), or vice versa, and you can clearly see which pictures(which points) will be accepted and which will be rejected. Dandy. Except that that's not what the graph needs to look like to mimic the trends in the positions of actual images. It's hard to say exactly what it would look like, but I can get the concepts down and let the program take care of the rest. A few characteristics of the goal graph: area around image points, axis-parallel lines out from points, perpendicular rotation of shape about origin, image point shadows, threads between points, and quite a few others I haven't nailed down. I've solved the first one. The idea there is that, for any clear picture, there is some amount of error or static you can add to each pixel and still keep the picture essentially and recognizably what it is. On the graph, this means that there is a certain distance out you can go in any direction (direction=one color of one pixel in the image, or movement parallel to an axis) or combination of directions from the point that represents the clear image, and still be in essentially the same place. So, if that point is one color, the area around it must be as well, but not the area beyond that. It's possible to draw a nice simple square/box/hypercube around that area with a two-level bit of neural net, but with the number of sides needed(two per axis, >80000 axes), that box is prohibitively expensive in terms of how many nodes the net contains. I eventually worked out that if, instead of multiplying each input by a weight, then summing them and running them through the sigmoid, you add a bias to each input, square each result, then do all the rest, it draws a nice little resizable egg of whichever color around any point you want, with one layer, startlingly few nodes, and the added benefit that the list of the biases, laid out in a rectangle, is the clear picture you started with. So, that's where I'm coming from. Any suggestions? --Black Carrot 03:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Wow, you've really given this a lot of thought, I'm impressed. I still think the number of calculations necessary to search all of Google for all pictures of trees would take way too long to be practical for a search at present, but perhaps it would be good to have the technology ready and waiting for when such computing capacity comes along. Of course, just like voice recognition, I doubt if once you have the program optimized to find trees if it will be any good at finding, say, birds, until you alter the program significantly, then the same for every other object it needs to recognize.

I think some of the steps necessary for this to work might be valuable in and of themselves, however. I listed one above, another that interests me is "reverse pixelization". That is, I would like to be able to take a bitmap of a line and a circle, say, and create a vector representation of the geometric elements. One application would be to take a low res picture and generate a higher res pic of the same thing. Edge recognition is one aspect of any such program, that might be mentioned under machine vision.

Well, as I say, I'm quite skeptical that you will get the full program to work anytime soon, but still think it is valuable for it's side benefits. And, if you can write and sell such a program, I'm sure it would be worth millions! StuRat 06:14, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I have done this before. The approach outlined is feasible, but I think you need to make your project a bit more well defined before you will be able to achieve much. It seems that you know what you need to look for, but to really get your project up and running, I would suggest that you simplify the problem first before proceeding. Try this: take a 8 by 8 grid, and see if you can create a neural network which can distinguish the characters A, O and E written on the grid in a pixelated form. Also, for your tree recognition scheme, you may want to consider alternative measures of classification which do not rely on the network of sigmoidal functions. There are plenty of quality papers on complexity analysis, image processing which will be handy. You may also want to search for imaging journals which deal specifically with diagnosis and such - many image processing/recognition algorithms are well established and used in the medical field. --HappyCamper 06:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I definitely agree with starting with small, simple tasks and working your way up. Then again, this approach is recommended for any complex problem. StuRat 07:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
You might wanna look into Military Image Recognition Systems. --Jvh, 7 January 2006

Neural nets are (amoungst other, equivilent descriptions) a statistics object. It might be worth persuing them from that angle, particularly if you're looking for rigourus descriptions. Also, with the resoulution upscaling, there's a lot of work on statistics applied to images that would be useful background reading. Syntax 22:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

StuRat- I don't see why a well-designed system would take any more processing than what they already do, which is substantial in itself. Actually running something once through a net doesn't take much, and training it isn't that different from running something through it a few thousand times, so although I wouldn't be able to set it up on my laptop, I think the technology to do so is already sitting in Google's basement. Also, what I was talking about above is a system for describing the entire theoretical graph of all images in existence. Once I've got some idea of how that would work(like the example above), an idea of what mathematical and computational structure it would take to efficiently seperate all recognizable images from the near infinity of static surrounding them(and it is near infinity, try calculating the area of the graph), I'm pretty sure any net I base on it will work for all search terms. If you meant, once I'd done a search on trees it would be hard to move it to something else, that's no problem. I expect to start with a blank net each time I run a search anyway. I believe software is available that turns pictures into collections of vectors, if you're looking for it. My brother is into art, and his pad does that. As to the selling- I hope so, but I kind of like the idea of providing it for free. Also, according to the google searches I've been doing for hints on how to build nets, there are companies that are already marketing things a lot like this, and I'm not interested in competing for business.
HappyCamper- What do you mean by 'done this before'? Which bit? Professionally, or as a hobby? And what about the outline is feasible? What's undefined about it? Is it important to use A, O and E specicifically, or any set of letters? Or all letters? Using specific drawings of them, or a range of styles? What papers or how-tos, specifically, would you recommend, and how do I get to them?
Jvh- I wouldn't think they'd be sharing any of that information, but if you know how I can get it, I'd love to learn it.
Syntax- ???
Also, six clarifying statements, which I think should be more common in long discussions: I would prefer to use just neural nets, I don't care about the complexities of optimization until I have something up and running, I (as a highschooler) don't have access to anything and don't have experience finding it, I'm pretty sure going below 150x150 pixels would radically change the structure of what I'm doing (how we recognize things begins to change at that level) which means anything that works at 8x8 has limited application except as general practice, I support general practice as a way of getting an intuitive grasp of a system and have been doing it for quite a while already, and I don't care about most of the things the papers I can get to are about, like facial recognition and 3D recognition, just making a reliable searching tool.
One further question: does anyone know how to take a y=1/x graph and get a higher-dimensional version of it? I've decided I can combine two functions(area around image points, axis-parallel lines out from points) by taking each point that represents a clear image, and drawing curves asymptotically out in all axial directions. With three inputs(axes,dimensions), this would resemble six cones attached to the corners of an octahedron. With two inputs, this would resemble the graphs y=1/x and y=-1/x combined, meaning that if I made a two-input, two-level, three-node net out of the formulae O1= I1*12, O2= -I1*I2, and O3= O1+O2, or more accurately, O1= sig(B1+W1*((I1-B2)*(I2-B3))), O2= sig(B1-W1((I1-B2)*(I2-B3))), and O3= sig(-W3(O1+O2-.5)), where W means weight and B means bias, I would have what I wanted. This has proved difficult to extend to three inputs, and beyond. Another I need, beside the one above, is another way of taking 1/x to higher dimensions, three planes perpendicular to each other with curves asympotically approaching them, which would resemble a cube with all six corners carved out.
I appreciate all the help. --Black Carrot 23:06, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
BTW, since this is getting pretty long, should we move it to my talk page? --Black Carrot 23:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] can normal people get atum bombe?

using household stuff

No, not unless you keep enriched uranium and plutonium in the cupboard next to the enriched flour. If so, you need to be extra careful when baking bread. StuRat 00:02, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
See Radioactive Boy Scout Dismas|(talk) 00:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 7

[edit] Penis

Is it average for a 14 year old to have a 6 3/4 inch long penis and have 4 inches gurth?

That depends on if you are looking at a naked 14 year old girl at the time. StuRat 00:10, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Studies on penis size are generally done on adults. So you probably will not find a study anywhere that gives averages for teenagers. Although, according to the Human penis size article, you're off to a good start. Dismas|(talk) 00:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I second the above. I'm very familiar with the research on human penis size, and there has never been any research on 14 year olds (for obvious reasons). That said, let me warn you that there has never been high-quality research done on human penis size, regardless of age - it's just not a practical undertaking. The best we can say, given the limits of our current research, is that the average American penis is between 5 and 7 inches. So you're doing fine. --George 05:18, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
You are not as familiar as you think you are. I put a reference to such a study on the talk page of that very article last year at someone's request; it is still there. alteripse 01:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
"Very familiar" ? As the measurer or the measuree ? LOL StuRat 07:14, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Alas, it's mostly an academic familiarity at this point. But I'm always seeking volunteers... --George 00:48, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Wow, wikipedia really does have everything. Check out Penis#Size. It says, "the human penis is larger than that of the common chimpanzee, both proportional to body size and in absolute terms; one study has found that the average human penis is 5 inches (12.7 cm) in length when fully engorged with blood during arousal." No source though. --Quasipalm 15:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


exactly why would anyone like to know this subject???????

Penis data envy ? StuRat 18:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Who was that? Black Carrot 23:17, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Your question says more about you than about the people interested in this subject. JackofOz 10:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ethanol as fuel

If the U.S. capitalizes on the ethanol gas, how much do you think gas would go down? How much would Americans be saving?

Cars can run up to about 25% ethanol with conventional engines, which would make some difference, but not too much, on a global scale, especially since 10% ethanol is already used in many areas. On the other hand, if car engines were retooled to use 99% ethanol (with 1% gasoline in a special tank for cold weather starting), then that would have quite a significant impact on world petroleum consumption and thus prices. Unfortunately, ethanol prices would likely skyrocket, at least until production caught up with demand. A mixture of technologies, like ethanol, diesel, electric, hydrogen fuel cell, and compressed natural gas, is likely to avoid the type of supply shocks we get when solely dependent on one type of fuel. For example, if a family owns a gasoline car and an ethanol car, they could switch which one they drive dependent on the relative prices of each. This price elasticity would cause price stability, unlike the current inelastic price curve for gasoline, which causes price instability. Flexible fuel vehicles are thus ideal for managing prices. StuRat 00:16, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Pay close attention to Brazil. They are in the middle of an attempted transition between petrol and ethanol. There are problems. Many of them appear to be solved. --Kainaw (talk) 00:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
However, Brazil has warmer weather than the US, so doesn't need the same alternate cold-weather gasoline starting tank. StuRat 00:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Or, you could just provide better insulation for the tank. Gasoline would probably be cut down into a "backup" fuel source should the temperature dip below 13 degrees Celsius. The thing about ethanol is at least it's renewable: you can just keep on growing sugarcane or glucose-producing plants. I mean heck, someone could probably invent some new process to convert cellulose into ethanol. I guess the alcoholic beverage industry would probably boom with this, perhaps. (This reminds me that someone could possibly make a joke about ethanol as fuel, and "drunk" driving. Heh heh.) Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 12:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
The problem isn't that ethanol freezes in the tank, but rather that when it evaporates in the carbuerator it lowers the temp too much, which causes moisture in the air to ice up and block the carb. After it has been running for a while, engine heat can be used to counter this tendency. But, using gasoline until the engine reaches operating temp is a good fix until then. StuRat 17:08, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking more about the flash point (since ethanol freezes at negative 114 degrees Celsius and freezing isn't so much of a concern anyhow), but then you just reminded me what a great coolant ethanol actually is. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 20:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I wonder if the evaporative cooling of ethanol could be used to significantly cool the passenger compartment on hot days, prior to burning the ethanol in the engine. This would have the disadvantage that a broken heat exchanger could potentially spray ethanol into the passenger compartment (instead of the current antifreeze), so a more reliable heat exchanger design would be needed. Somehow I doubt if the cooling would be sufficient to replace A/C, but perhaps could help it out a bit. Alternatively, if used to cool the engine, perhaps a slightly smaller radiator would be needed. In the case of a tiny engine, perhaps air-cooling would be sufficient, like the old VW Beetle. This could improve fuel economy by eliminating the weight of a conventional liquid cooling system. StuRat 20:49, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Two notes: Brazil has some very cold areas both in the mountains and in the deep south. So, it does have a problem with starting in cold weather. The common solution is a mini-gasoline tank for cold weather starting. As for why ethanol causes a problem. The boiling point of gasoline is 40°C and ethanol is 60-80°C (I'm going from memory, I'm sure the articles here have the specific temp). So, in cold weather, ethanol doesn't vaporize as well and liquid doesn't like to burn. --Kainaw (talk) 20:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I would state it slightly differently, that vaporizing ethanol takes more energy, in the form of heat, than gasoline, so the temp drops more when it is vaporized in the carb, thus causing the icing mentioned previously. StuRat 20:56, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] computer display screen readability

Hello,

What makes some handheld computer and cell phone displays easier to read than others, both indoors and outside? If i was looking at a specification for different types of displays, what attributes contribute to readability the most?

thank you so much for answering my question!

--Linda

A backlight is very important, as is the text size, those should be in the specs. However, the contrast of the display relative to the background and the reflectivity and hardness of the glass or plastic bezel (and thus the resistance to scratches) is not something you are likely to see in the specs, so you should check each one out in person, if possible. One warning, don't fall for the stupid plastic film that "shows you" what it will look like when running, actually test it out. StuRat 00:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


I always have trouble pertaining to the subject at hand. I can never read what is on my laptop while i'm on the bus. I would also say that text size is important, but you may also want to keep your files private from peering eyes. i've also found that my laptop has had a clearer and brighter screen ever since i have gotten that new screen protector that is on television.

The vibrations from the bus will make it even more difficult to read. Hmmm, that sounds like something that could be improved, maybe with goggles with LCD screens inside them. That way, the screen would move in synch with your eyes. StuRat 20:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] internet? problem

hey i am really having a hard time. can you give me a website to find background information on linear dynamics? i've been working on it for 10 hours and can't find anything about background stuff. grateful for all help. --sami

Hi Sami. Have you seen Dynamical system#Linear dynamical systems already? --Quasipalm 03:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] pendullum

ON which principle does pendulum of clock work?I have a clock which has pendulum to show seconds measurement.It is not getting any energy from gear etc..but still it oscillates continuously.It is just placed on a pivot and after giving just slight push it gains its original motion with increased oscilations.How it doesn't loose energy by friction?

It does lose energy by friction, just very slowly. You will eventually need to push the pendulum again, unless it is one of those you also plug in. That type uses electricity to give the pendulum a little push with each swing. StuRat 07:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't have to be electric. Wind-up pendulum clocks feed energy from the spring into the pendulum to keep it swinging. If you look closely, you will always find a mechanism that gives energy to the pendulum. --Heron 15:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
There's a fun desk toy that's based around a pendulum that never stops, and climbs back up to full swing if you reduce its arc. It uses a magnet in the weight and an electromagnet in the base that turns rhythmically on and off, or north and south, or something like that, based on an electric timer on a chip. Every time the pendulum swings near the base, it's given a little magnetic kick to keep it going. Of course, that would be a pretty pointless pendulum to use for a clock, since you could just hook the clock straight up to the chip and cut out the middleman. Apparently, people do it anyway, if StuRat is right. --Black Carrot 23:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, they do it because people like clocks that look traditional, but don't require winding, lifting weights, etc. If you think about it, the old rotating dial clocks are all quite silly and old-fashioned now that we have easier to read digital clocks, but many people still prefer those, too. StuRat 09:00, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] VIRUS

How would I go about to make a virus from normal pathogens and atoms that you would find in many house holds?

There are machines that can assemble short DNA strands from the amino acids, but I don't think they are yet to the point where they could build even a simple retrovirus, which is basically just DNA. To build a virus at present, you would start from an existing virus and alter it to have the desired characteristics. StuRat 07:06, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
It would be an interesting consequence of structural biology when we could start engineering retroviruses from scratch as biological weapons. Morbid, as well. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 13:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Just to be pedantic, the Retroviridae are RNA viruses. That is, they have an RNA genome and require enzymes such as reverse transcriptase and integrase to convert their RNA to DNA and integrate it into the host cell genome, or use the host's transcription machinery to make viral proteins. The thing that eludes me is: Why don't retroviruses just start using host transciption to make viral proteins directly from their native RNA? Why not just bypass that whole reverse transcription thing? All I can think of is the extra transcription may allow for incresed genetic variability through spontaneous mutations (transcription errors), but I'm just guessing. Anyone else know? -- Mattopaedia 00:57, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
For one, not having its RNA converted to DNA would mean it couldn't incorporate into the host's genome and therefore wouldn't be replicated. --David Iberri (talk) 16:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Right! I suppose that's easier then evolving your own RNA copyase to replicate yourself. Bugger! I should've thought of that.... Mattopaedia 10:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
If you want to do it with household equipments, not a laboratory, I guess it's much easier to build a computer virus. – b_jonas 14:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

You could, of course, spend the day at the mall (or other crowded place), mid winter, don't wash your hands and hope you catch a virus. Then proceed to sneeze on everyone in your household. Use them to incubate the virus, then send them off to the mall once again to sneeze on people. Nrets 03:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

The recipe to the deadly H5N1 virus is here. People who can recreate it are here. Talk to them. WAS 4.250 02:43, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

See also December_2005_in_science Dec 19 "Craig Venter is spearheading a project to create the first synthetic lifeform by designing its DNA from scratch and then fusing it with a microbe membrane." A microbe, not a virus , but close. GangofOne 21:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eye sight question (dim light)

I know that reading and other nearwork may lead to myopia, but does darkness have anything to do with it? Say reading with a very little light, or using a computer late at night with no lights on? Thanks in advance. Gflores Talk 07:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I think I answered a very similar question earlier. It is important to have the room light match to light on or from the object you are viewing. That is, dim the lights when reading a dim computer screen, and brighten them when reading a bright computer screen. StuRat 07:18, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
The short answer is yes, because in dim light you may inconsciously hold the book closer to your eyes or lean too close to the computer monitor. – b_jonas 14:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] global warming

if the effects of global warming starts to increase which city/region would be most affected?.....thank you! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.92.36.232 (talk • contribs).

It greatly depends on exactly what the patterns are and is very uncertain, and it depends on whether the warming is greater in some areas or others. Presumably, Holland might start to suffer the effects first, or any low-lying areas. (Israel, perhaps). Climate modelling is an interesting field. You might want to check out effects of global warming.

Which region is way too specific (let alone which city). Firstly, it is quite certain now that pumping all sorts of gases (most notably CO2) in the atmosphere will be a climatic effect, so there will be a climate change. This will most likely be global warming, which means just that. There will be a warming that is global, meaning worldwide. At least, that is what is most likely to happen in the near future. But the climate is so complex that it's hard to say what will happen next. One possibility is that the Atlantic gulf stream, which warms North America and Europe will stop, which might trigger an ice age. Of course, if heat no longer gets transported to the North it will remain at the equator, meaning that cold regions get colder and hot regions get hotter. But, like I said, what exactly will happen is very uncertain. It's a global experiment.
But one thing that is very likely to happen is the rising of sea levels, which will indeed threaten Holland and other lowlying parts of the Netherlands. But also other lowlying countries, some of which are among the poorest on Earth, such as Bangladesh and the Maldives, which don't have the means to protect themselves (we Dutch do, though even for us the expense might be crippling). Especially the latter get a lot of attention because the islands are so idyllic. Now isn't that a shame? Sure, but the population of 350 thousand is almost negligible compared to the 150 million of Bangladesh. Other densely populated lowlying areas can be found in the southern US, such as Florida. And New Orleans will get hit again unless a decent defence is put up this time. This won't hit as fast as a hurricane, though (a few decades maybe). But speaking of hurricanes. These get fed by hot sea water and global warming will of course also heat up the oceans. So there will be many more hurricanes. And one famous hurricane zone is the Caribbean. So again, the southern US. If you have any property there you'd better sell it now before other people start to wisen up too. DirkvdM 14:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I vote for Tokelau: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/tl.html
Since it is only 3 meters above sea level, I'm amazed it doesn't get wiped out by big waves now. Global warming and rising sea levels are sure to do it in, though. Also note that some areas will benefit. Greenland, for example, is covered by glaciation now. If those glaciers melt, it will be an enormous chunk of land available for development. Canada and Russia might also benefit, as most of their land masses are unusable arctic tundra at present. StuRat 17:54, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] computer rays

how do the rays from computers affect our eyes?

Look up, way up! (for Friendly Giant fans). It's the same as the general eyesight question. This must be a big thing on the homework front these days. --Zeizmic 15:02, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

well not exactly...i was just curious:)

What rays did you have in mind? Light rays enable us to see them, but see radiation for a description of other sorts of rays. I think the item that will best answer you question is Cathode_ray_tube#Health_danger. --Shantavira 16:28, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ancient indian text on aviation

ancient indian hermit & philosophist bharadwaja concieved ideas about flyinh machines which could carry people.this was about 5000 yrs ago (supposition).many of his own designs as in the text,was later found to be in resonanace with,latest aviation theories.as science advances ,how his ideas can be dealt with,on grounds of modern engineering principles?

Many ancients thought of flying. Leonardo da Vinci was known for his engineering drawings of flying machines, among other things. The ancient Greek myth of Daedalus and Icarus also featured a flying machine. The idea that if birds can fly, then people should be able to fly if they just strap on a pair of wings is just wrong, though. People would need a completely different body design, with half our muscles in our arms, minimal legs, and lightweight, hole-filled bones, for that to work. The first concept needed for flying is the airfoil, which provides lift by moving forward without flapping the wings. The next concept is that control surfaces, or some other means of control (like a deformable wing) are needed. These things could have been discovered by the ancients, and could get you a decent glider using, say, a balsa wood frame with silk fabric. However, the development of internal combustion engines was necessary to make machines capable of true flight. StuRat 17:30, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] misleading websites

I keep coming across websites that are not what their name suggests they are, e.g. they might link to a competitor's website (like www.national-express.co.uk links to a rail site instead of a coach site), or all the useful-looking links from a fansite turn out to link to commercial sites or attempt to upload files to my computer. Is there a name for such sites? I am trying to remove them from Wikipedia but would like to know how to describe them. They don't necessarily seem to be mousetraps. --Shantavira 16:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, and I've also noticed misspellings of common websites, like http://www.gookle.com/, are packed with ads. The level of deception online is quite amazing, mainly due to a lack of laws and law enforcement actions. StuRat 17:15, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
A you suggesting there needs to be more control of the Internet? By who? The problem is not a lack of laws, it is people who are willfully ignorant. If people don't make the effort to educate themselves about how it works and don't learn to do a little bit of critical thinking they are going to be flimflammed regardless of how many laws get passed. I'm not talking about fraud--that is and should be illegal--I'm advising a bit of caution and caveat emptor.--◀Pucktalk▶ 07:13, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I do think many of the misleading ads reach the level of fraud, such as windows that pop up with an apparent Windows error message, and have a link to download a "fix", which really installs some little nasty on your computer. StuRat 09:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
You're probably talking about stuf like this. Yeah, it pushes the line, but part of educating yourself is knowing that a web site cannot know what you have installed on your computer--at least not if don't use IE. This script will show all that a website can know about your computer. And any user who doesn't know how to monitor their own system for spyware probably shouldn't be on the Internet to start with.--◀Pucktalk▶ 11:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Pushes the line ? I think lying to people to get them to give you access to their computer like that is way over the line. Unfortunately, I don't think they have anything to fear from law enforcment for that type of thing. StuRat 02:50, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
The terms you are looking for are Typosquatting and Cybersquatting. David D. (Talk) 18:18, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adams apple

What signifince do larger Adam's apples have? What causes protuding adams apples, and what does this mean in terms of the body?

A protruding Adam's Apple could be a sign of an enlarged thyroid gland. My brother had that and had thyroid cancer. So, go to a doctor and have it checked out. StuRat 20:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
The Adam's Apple is the protrusion of the thyroid cartilages of the larynx. The larynx is essentially a semi-rigid box that facilitates resonance from the vocal cords. The significance is that its owner may posess a deep voice. There are several factors contributing to the normal variation of degree of protrusion, including, but not limited to:
  1. Gender (male>female)
  2. Developmental stage (prepubescent<adult)
  3. Body fat (fat neck hides it)
  4. Individual anatomic variation
There are also pathologic reasons for enlargement of the Adam's Apple, however, these usually result in an observable increase in size of the structure over time, that cannot be readily explained by normal causes, such as onset of puberty. Thyroid cancer can cause swellings in the neck, and these usually occur first at the front of the base of the neck, below the Adam's Apple. Thyroid cancers are also (usually) not as firm to the touch as the Adam's Apple is, and are often asymetric in appearance. Any concern about cancer is best addressed by your doctor - if you have any new swelling or mass or spot or whatever, anywhere, get it checked out. Far better to be told its normal than sit on something deadly. --Mattopaedia 01:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, don't be afraid if it is thyroid cancer, since that's one of the most treatable forms of cancer. This is because of the thyroid's affinity for iodine. After removal, radioactive iodine can be ingested, which will destroy any missed thyroid tissue, before metastasis can occur, which is typically how cancer kills. I believe thyroid cancer has a 98% cure rate as a result. However, after removal of the thyroid, it is necessary to take meds, such as Synthroid, for life. StuRat 09:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
There are several forms of thyroid cancer, and they all behave differently. The papillary form is far and away the most common variant and has the best prognosis because it tends to only grow locally and is less likely to invade adjacent structures or metastasize (spread to other organs). There are significantly nastier variants such as the anaplastic type, which has an exceeding poor prognosis. See thyroid cancer for more information. -- Mattopaedia 23:34, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] scientific method

i am a student doing some studying for midterms, and i am desperate to find the answer to this question: Knowledge and application of the scientific method:

  • question
  • hypothesis
  • design/perform experiment
  • collection/ analysis of data
  • conclusion
  • communication

i'm only in the 6th grade and i need some help. if you end up spelling something wrong i probably will correct you because i am the number one speller in my county. thank you! sorry if i sounded like i was showing off.


from,

  1. 1speller
  • You don't actually have a question there. The sure tip-off is the lack of a question mark. Also, you might want to extend your spelling skills to the proper capitalization of words.StuRat 18:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

well typically i'd need to know the application of the scientific method to those, hey i'm only 11.

  • I don't think 11 is too young to capitalize. In some cases, I don't even think it's too young for capital punishment. StuRat 02:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Hi there chum! I've formatted your post a little better so hopefully it will be more readable. What you have described is generally what is taught as "the scientific method". We have an article on the scientific method which might be somewhat useful, but it is probably more complicated than what you can use. The basic point of the scientific method is to ask questions about nature which can be checked to be right or wrong. What your midterms are probably requiring you to know is how each of those steps participate in doing this. Try looking at our article and see if it makes sense to you, if not maybe others can help out. --Fastfission 19:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Wow, whoever wrote scientific method really has a thing for elevated vocabulary. Black Carrot 23:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I hate when people write in unnecessarily complex terms. Please feel free to simplify it, to make it readable by a general audience. StuRat 01:05, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree. I mentioned it on the talk page so maybe they'll attempt to rewrite it. To #1speller you really need to work on punctuation. No capitals at all looks quite lazy. I assume you don't wish to give this impression? David D. (Talk) 01:10, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Good luck: There is a small entry on the scientific method in our simple English Wikipedia, which is designed to be more easy to understand than our other entry. Perhaps it will be useful. --Fastfission 00:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Your what? Black Carrot 02:05, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Argg, I tried to link to the simple Wikipedia but I did it incorrectly, obviously. Anyway I fixed it now. --Fastfission 17:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Holy cow! That article is unreadable. It's way beyond my assumed audience of 'National Geographic' (or grades 10-12). How could one tackle this? --Zeizmic 15:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

And here I thought National Geographic readers couldn't read at all, but just wanted to check out the bare-breasted native women. StuRat 09:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
ps. I take this all back. I read the discussion, and I wouldn't touch it with a 10' monotone soliloquy. --Zeizmic 15:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Is it possible to provide a link from the main Scientific Method page to the simple one? Black Carrot 19:57, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] verizon

What do you want to know about it ? StuRat 03:35, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
You know, when people abandon their posts for days like this, I have to wonder how many come back and check even when there was a question. 69.154.179.63 02:43, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Router for large network

Is there a limit to how many computers a router can handle? Should a standard 4-port router such as the Linksys BEFSR41 be enough to serve IP addresses to a network of 30 or more computers via various switches, hubs and wireless access points? If not, what kind of a router is needed? Thank you, Adam Konner 19:06, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Routers don't specifically "serve IP addresses" (unless the router is also doing something else, or unless this is what you are meaning by NAT). What is the router actually doing in your network? Notinasnaid 19:08, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Jebums, that was fast. My router serves as a gateway between the LAN and the cable modem, and also as the network's DHCP server, hence the serving of IP addresses. --Adam Konner 19:17, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, there are two things to worry about: limitations – for example I have seen a firewall that will only allow 50 IP addresses; and performance. From a performance point of view, cable internet connections are incredibly slow, compared to the potential network speed, so even the cheapest router isn't likely to be fazed. Routers are able to be used to connect two full speed wired networks. Limits you'd need to check the documentation for your specific router. It also needs a sufficient supply of addresses for DHCP of course, but that's under your control. DHCP itself puts a trivial load on its server. Notinasnaid 19:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Here's why I wonder: When I asked the Comcast guy if the new service would be sufficient to support 30 computers, he said that would be fine, all I'd need is a router that can handle all those computers. I can't find anything in the router's documentation about it. Searching for answers on the internet, I found this webpage that says, "On an eight-port wireless router, you may only use a total of eight connections, not eight wireless and eight wired." However, now I've found another page that seems to contradict the first one. By the way, when you say cable internet is incredibly slow, do you mean relative to ethernet networks (obvious) or relative to DSL? --Adam Konner 19:57, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Just relative to a 100 mbps wired ethernet. Is this router also a wireless access point? Notinasnaid 20:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

No, we have a high-powered antenna (AirPoint PRO Outdoor) attached via ethernet. Why? --Adam Konner 20:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I think we are talking pure dedicated routers here without wireless or multiple ports. I have an old Netgear RT311 and it chokes with the multiple IP connections that gtk-gnutella generates. I have to knock that value way down. I can't find specs on general router processor speed, and #IP connections, but I am sure this is important for 30 computer connections. --Zeizmic 23:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Do hippos have enemies?

Someone inserted the following passage:

  • The only animal of any danger to the hippo is the rhino, which is a lethal enemy to our friend the hippopotamus.

Don't worry, it got of course deleted. But the question remains: Do hippos have enemies? Common Man 19:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I can think of one... (I don't think full-grown hippos have a natural enemies, but I don't know for sure) --Fastfission 19:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, sadly there are two types of human enemies: poachers and warriors according to Hippopotamus#Extinction. Common Man 19:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
yeah, human beings, in short. Even those who don't directly kill them but indirectly destroy their habitat by wasteful consumption. deeptrivia (talk) 21:08, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Anything other than people? Black Carrot 02:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Crocodiles. There was a documentary on television last month about hippos. It showed a young hippo swimming around and then killed and eaten by a croc. As for the human/hippo relation, the hippo kills more humans in Africa each year than any animal other than other humans. --Kainaw (talk) 02:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm sure from the hippos' point of view we've got it coming to us.--◀Pucktalk▶ 06:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I supose they could, but the size of the enema bag would be so large that...oh wait, you asked about enemies, never mind ! StuRat 09:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Hippos have only one enemy they fear -- Chuck Norris. --71.130.243.161 10:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PS3 GPU RSX

There is a rumor going on on the internet that say that the PS3's GPU codenamed RSX developed by Sony and Nvidia is less powerful then Nvidia's upcoming GEFORCE 7800 GTX? Is this true? If it is true then that would mean that the PS3's graphics are going to be obselete compared to computers that would use the 7800GTX.


The "RSX" that the PS3 uses is basically a copy of the 7800GTX except the "RSX" may be a little faster. As with all consoles and the PS3 is no exception, every console is obsolete as soon as they are released because high end gaming computers catch up and eventually surpass console hardware technology in a couple of months.

Having said that, console graphics have an advantage in that programmers learn to get the most out of the hardware over time, so console graphics (I think) do improve slightly despite the actual hardware being the same. --Sum0 20:27, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
To say the same thing with different words, PC game developers must cater for the widest range of videocards, cpu and ram configurations, so any features that are are harder to implement and less likely to work on common hardware won't make it into the product. But I think it's plain to see the relationship between graphics and gameplay is now not 1:1 at all, it is necessary to pump exponentionally(?) more effort into graphics capability to increase the enjoyability levels linearly. Tzarius 03:20, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What causes the magnetic dipole moment of an atom?

I've read our articles on magnet and magnetism, which say that magnetic fields are caused by the motion of charges, but then add that electrons in atoms don't actually move. What electrons actually do in atoms, apparently, is (i) to sit around in orbitals and (ii) to possess a property called spin, but they neither orbit nor spin in the mechanical sense. How does this mysterious behaviour create a magnetic dipole? I'd like to add the answer to this question to our articles, even if it's just that "nobody knows". --Heron 20:49, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, quantum spin isn't exactly like mechanical rotation, but they do share many properties. I think every particle with both charge and spin has a magnetic moment, including the proton and the electron. Even the neutron has a magnetic moment, because it is made of spinning, charged quarks. —Keenan Pepper 22:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
There is two direct contributions to an atomic magnetic moment: Electron spin and spin-orbit coupling. Electron spin is the biggest contribution, and basically comes from the fact that each electron has a magnetic moment, and therefore the magnetic moment of an atom is equal to the difference between the number of spin up and spin down electrons. If you like, each electron is a tiny dipole, and an atom gets the net sum of those.
Spin orbit coupling is more involved, and arises from relativity - Diracs equations describe this. It's not possible to give a non-relativistic analogy directly. The 'spin-only' approximation is close enough for many purposes, however. Syntax 23:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll revisit the magnetism-related articles. There were some contradictory statements, about electrons moving/not moving, that I was unhappy with. By the way, can you give me an idea of the accuracy of the 'spin-only' approximation? A few per cent, or a few parts per million? --Heron 12:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

It's around 10% out. That is, however, enough to clearly identify the net spin of a atom. See [30] for some example numbers. Note that, as that page is aimed for chemists, it's talking in terms of moles of ions, not individual atoms. Also, on the electrons moving / not moving thing - note that there are multiple equivilent ways of describing the same phenomena. You can describe electrons as moving but not emmiting EM radiation, or as static but generating a magnetic moment, and you ends up with the same sort of descriptions; both of these are approximations to the real situation. Syntax 14:47, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I was thinking about differences in electronegativity between atoms, but then I realise that is the cause of dipole momenets in molecules, not atoms. But I'd thought I mention it anyway. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 15:43, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 8

[edit] Circulatory System

== How long does it take for a drop of blood to travel through your entire body? ==

Could a link please by supplied to a reliable source... thanks --Ike 01:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, you're going to have a hard time finding a straight answer, because blood doesn't travel in drops, and some paths back to the heart are short while others are very long (going through mazes of capillaries). —Keenan Pepper 02:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Keenan's right. Any given drop of blood will travel along random pathways throughout the circulatory system, and during that journey the fluid and cellular components of blood are continually exchanged. So the answer to your question is : "it depends".
Of more use to you may be that there is a way of averaging this, which doctors use, based on a person's cardiac output. The link, & its links, give some reasonably detailed information, but in short:
  • Average heart rate =70 beats/minute, average stroke volume (amount pumped in a single beat from the left ventricle) = 70mL.
  • Cardiac output = Heart rate x stroke volume, so cardiac output = ~4.9L/min. (A gallon is about 4.5L if you're in the US & don't do metric). -- Clearly I don't do antiquated and unnecessarily complex measurement systems. A gallon is 3.785L according to this. --Mattopaedia 08:37, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Average blood volume is about 8% bodyweight in kg. So for the "average" 70kg man, blood volume is about 5.6L.
  • So, the heart pumps the equivalent of total blood volume about every 68 seconds.
Any human physiology text can give you these details. To check my numbers, I used Guyton & Hall (1996), Textbook of Physiology (9th Ed). Hope that helps. Mattopaedia 05:47, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


  • It also depends upon what you mean by 'blood'. white blood cells for example (along with lots of the water that constitutes blood, and probably some of the smaller molecules) can actually leave the blood vessels and percolate(?) through the tissue, before entering the lymphatic system, pootling around the lymph nodes/spleen etc, and eventually rejoining the circulatory system.
red blood cells, on the other hand, stay in the circulatory system as far as I'm aware. So, depending upon what part of 'blood' you are talking about, it might take the senic route. dakad 16:59, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] how does an oil derrick function

Have you looked at Oil derrick? Black Carrot 06:38, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] When was the first offshore oil drilling rig in the US built?

It seems in 1894, "Summerland, the first offshore oil field to be developed in the United States, had been discovered near Santa Barbara, California." In 1903, a "wooden pier that rested on stilt-like piles stretched out into the ocean at Summerland and a number of rigs drilled from it." - Akamad 03:49, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Black Holes

I am a tad confused about the concept of, what is described in our article on black holes as "narrow jets of particles at relativistic speeds." I was wondering how this works, because I was under the impression that the gravity in a black hole was strong enough such that no matter can escape its gravitational pull. So how is it possible that the black hole can "eject" particles outwards and away from it's über strong gravity? Thank you. - Akamad 03:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

The particles are not coming from inside the black hole, but from the accretion disk of matter around it. The particles can still escape from the black hole's gravity as long as they have not passed the event horizon. —Keenan Pepper 06:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
In fact, this allow virtual particles that form at the edge of the event horizon but not past it, to separate from each other before they annihilate, then being ejected, resulting in hawking radiation. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 09:50, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the responses. - Akamad 19:20, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jews

Are Jews (the people group, not the religion) smarter as a race? Because there seems to be alot of famous Jewish people, for exanple 22% percebt of Nobel Prize winners are Jews. So, do the Jews have a genetic or ethnic advantage in mental intellengence?

I don't think so, but i do think that Jewish people are extreeeemely cool :D --Cosmic girl 04:00, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia has an article on Race and intelligence. - Akamad 04:34, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
The typical explanation is that Jewish culture values education and study more than other cultures. StuRat 07:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Several years ago I read that Jews have the highest rate of geniuses per capita than any other race/nationallity/etc (not sure which). Scots came 2nd. Unfortunately I don't know any details of the research. AllanHainey 14:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Bear in mind that this would be observed geniuses per capita, not actual genuises per capita. There may be many potential genuises in other societies which never had the opportunity to develop their intellect, due to cultural differences. StuRat 02:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
There are really next to no differences between ethnic groups genetically. Certainly not enough to make one race significantly more intelligent than another. StuRat's response seems reasonable, but any answer that takes genetics into account is simply racism, in the most basic sense of the term. --128.122.89.185 12:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think you can really consider something to be racist if it's factual. I mean, it's genetic differences that distinguish us from the bonobo. And genetic differences cause Down syndrome. It's just that nobody has been able to conclusively show any iota of genetic differences between the human "races" affecting intelligence or other abilities. --Booch 17:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Noone has been able to show that human "races" even exist in genetic terms. --BluePlatypus 10:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
This seems to be the ultimate "politically correct" propaganda. Of course they won't see a difference by race when looking at most random genes, like the ability to metabolize fats, for example. However, if they looked at specific genes for characteristics associated with race, like eye color, hair color, hair texture, skin color, eye shape, and facial bone structure, they most definitely would see genetic differences based on race. StuRat 16:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Cultural advancement of a group should not be mistaken for genetic superiority, it is like mistaking the superiority of a software for the hardware in the computer machine. Even if we all had similar computer hardware, since the software loaded in our machines will be different, it will make our computers look different. You may use different OS for example (OS is more like religious groups - I use Linux, but I am not a Jew). Race and skin color are more like the screen saver we use etc., etc. The main thing that really matters is the RAM and processor-speed; it can scientifically be proven that all humans have roughly the same levels. In the case of humans this all the more reinforced by the fact that a particular process of the brain can be trained to acheive high levels efficiency.

--sukivenkat 12:00, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Cool anthropomorphitization example. While the genetic differences are slight in terms of percentage of different DNA between different races (or, if you want to be politically correct, "gene pools"), that does not mean that those differences are insignificant. I believe we have 98% of our DNA in common with chimps/bonobos, but that hardly means the 2% is "insignificant". In the case of intelligence, it certainly has a genetic component which varies from individual to individual. Genuises run in certain families, for example. It certainly is, therefore, possible that differences exist between races/gene pools, as well. I'm not sure that if this was established scientifically, however, that such info would be of use. It would more likely be misused to say that "all members of group A are genuises and all members of group B are idiots", which, of course, is dead wrong. So, perhaps it's a good thing that a detailed scientific study can't be funded to determine the correlation of race with intelligence. 16:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
some years back some body was calling "genes" as being selfish and even sold lot of popular books on that. It possible to call a computer a genius if you want to sell particular hardware or a particular OS but it doesn't make much sense. Hardware clones are not really that useful but software clones are really useful. It is quite useful for example to make ImageCopies of some body's system who has done lot of building of software in a system and some body makes further progress from there on. Moreover as some body said many years back "The human essence (genius) is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In its reality it is the ensemble of social relations" ...

[edit] Speed of light

If nothing can reach the speed of light, why can light or electrons reach it?

Nothing can exceed the speed of light, and from what I gather, electrons cannot reach the speed of light anyway. - Akamad 04:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
And light, by definition, travels at the speed of light in a vacuum. - Akamad 04:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
If the light is not in a vacuum, it gets slowed down and other things (such as electrons) can travel faster than it. --AySz88^-^ 04:37, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
(edit conflict) It is not exactly true that nothing can reach the speed of light. To be more precise, although still not very precise, it is, according to current physics, impossible to accelerate matter up to or beyond the speed of light; that is, the speed of electromagnetic radiation in a vacuum. It is theoretically possible to have particles that have an imaginary rest mass and so always travel faster than light (tachyons), and I believe that photons (the particle associated with light), being massless, must travel at the "speed of light". Also note that the relevant limit is c, the speed of light in a vacuum. Electrons can be accelerated to very close to c. If they are traveling in something like glass or water, they can actually travel faster than light can travel in that medium, without ever exceeding c. This produces Cerenkov radiation, approximately similar to a sonic boom. This explanation is oversimplified and others more knowledgeable than I should feel free to correct me. — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:45, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
It's a common misconception that electrons go the speed of light in a wire. The electric current as a whole does go the speed of light, but the individual electrons don't go anywhere near that speed. The average speed of the electrons (the drift velocity) is about a millimeter per second, depending on the thickness of the wire and other factors. A good analogy is a water faucet. When you turn the faucet on, water instantly comes out, but that doesn't mean it came all the way from the water tower in that amount of time. The water was waiting in the pipe. When you turn on a light switch, the electrons going through the light bulb were already there waiting in the wires. They just get "pushed out" by the electrons coming from the power plant, so to speak. —Keenan Pepper 06:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
And to further clarify to other readers, the speed of light of an electric current comes in if say, that power plant was two light seconds away (and ignoring what would be massive amount of electric resistance in the wire, let's just assume it's a mile thick :p), then it would take two seconds for the electrons in the filament of the light bulb to start moving the moment the switch is flicked. The electrons from the power station electrons 600,000 km away (roughly) will take two seconds to push all the electrons between them and the electrons in the filament in order to get the electrons in the filament going. This is a necessary consequence, because otherwise you could transmit physical information (which represents order, something covered by the laws of thermodynamics faster than c. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 09:58, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, I'm not sure that's exactly true. If someone flipped a switch at the power plant, then it would definitely take two seconds for the light to turn on, but if you flipped a switch at your house, I don't think it would matter how far away the power plant was. Not really sure though, I bet it's some complicated differential equation or something... —Keenan Pepper 23:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, actually yes, electromotive force is still present in the circuit near the house (because of the supply to other places of demand). I was assuming a 1:1 correlation with the power plant and my house. That would pose an interesting question though. A broken circuit is likely to generate no EMF in the current and when closed, it would have to take 2 seconds to emerge and travel to my house, I would think? Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 06:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
In the case of turning a light with other circuits on nearby, the light will partially come on immediately (ignoring the short distance to the next circuit), that is it will be sharing current with the other circuits (other circuits will dim), but for the complete return to the steady state, it will take the full 2 seconds. Or twice that. The generator can't compensate by generating more current until it "senses" the variation of resistance on the line, and the varied current goes the other way. 2 seconds each way. (Actually, though, the speed of EMF changes in a wire is not c but approximately c/2 or so, depending on the material. The potential difference propagates atom to atom, which turns out to be less than c (but of the same order of magnitude)) GangofOne 18:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Nothing with mass can reach the speed of light; photons are massless therefore they can, but cannot exceed it. --128.122.89.185 12:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] is breaking the sound barrier as easy as snapping your fingers?

is breaking the sound barrier as easy as snapping your fingers? if you snap your fingers, is the resulting sound due to breaking the sound barrier, the subsequent impact, or simply the loss of force due to friction?

The sound comes from your fingertip hitting the base of your thumb. No sonic booms involved. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 05:58, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree there's no sonic boom, however I think your statement isn't completely true. When you click your fingers, what causes the sound is that you lean your ring finger to the base of your thumb and you snap your middle finger to it. If you do not put your ring finger there, and snap your middle finger that way, you don't get a click, only a much weaker thump sound, because the pad at base of the thumb is much softer than your ring finger which has a bone close to the surface. (It it, however, possible to use different fingers instead of the middle and ring finger and still produce the clicking sound, but this combination is the best. You can even use a finger of your other hand instead of your ring finger.) I am not sure, but I think that the vedge-shaped gap formed between the ring finger and base of the thumb might also take part in producing the sound.
For a sonic boom, you need an object moving with at least 300 m/s, and I don't suppose your finger would move with more than 0.5 m/s in a simple finger clicking. – b_jonas 14:09, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
When I snap, my ring finger and pinky together with the palm of my hand form a hollow cavity that acts as a resonator. If I move my pinky away, the resonator is smaller, so it sounds higher. —Keenan Pepper 22:44, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Snapping a whip is the easiest way to create a sonic boom. StuRat 07:09, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


if you google "sound geocities barrier snap" the very first page offered claims that a boom does occur on a very small scale.

[edit] Light in orbit

Given that light can be pulled inwards by gravity(by something as massive as a black hole), and that it has a reliable velocity, and that those are the only two characteristics necessary for something to move into orbit around a celestial body, it there light endlessly orbiting black holes? Is there a distance out from a black hole at which, if you weren't pulled apart by the gravity or something like that, you would see a ring of light all around you? Because that would be pretty cool. It'd be fun to imagine something so absolutely black(except radiation) being encased by a sphere of pure light. If so, would that be near the event horizon? One problem I've found with this is that black holes are constantly expanding, so the orbital distance would be increasing as well, meaning any light currently in perfect orbit would eventually get pulled in, but maybe that's not a problem. --Black Carrot 06:52, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I believe the orbital distance would be the event horizon. You are right that those orbits would be unstable due to the increasing size of the black hole. Therefore, I would expect you would find some, but not much, light in orbit at any given time. StuRat 07:13, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, as I understand it, the event horizon would be defined by the distance at which light almost escapes but not quite, and would therefore presumably contain some light "orbiting" the black hole. However, it would not appear as a sphere of light as you describe. If you are at a distance from the black hole, the light is on the event horizon and therefore unable to reach your eyes. Remember, for you to see a photon, it must reach your eyes. It doesn't shine in all directions. If it's orbiting, it will be invisible unless it breaks free somehow and travels toward you instead. Note that you may be able to see black-hole–related phenomena, including light trapped near the event horizon, but orbiting light shouldn't be one of them, as far as I can tell. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
If a black hole had a constant mass and a photon would be in orbit at that distance (I'll assume that that's the event horizon) then it would stay there, I presume. But how would it get there? As soon as it's within the event horizon it's lost. So it has to approach from the outside. The only way for it to do that would be to spiral in. But because it has to stabilise at exactly that distance that would only happen after an infinite amount of time. So I imagine there might be a halo of spiralling (not orbiting) photons just outside the event horizon, but none exactly at the event horizon. But even if the black hole were to expand a bit, then I don't think any photons would fall into place in that orbit, but that's just gut feeling. DirkvdM 10:09, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
The photons could also come in along a tangent to the event horizon, or what works out as a tangent, taking into account the bending of the ray, as it approaches the black hole. Also note that objects falling into the black hole would tend to dislodge photons from orbit as they pass the event horizon. StuRat 11:08, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I am not an expert from this, but I'll try to give some answers. You can find some interesting discussion on these effects on [31].
From what I understand, there is indeed such a sphere where light could circle endlessly, and this can happen not only for black holes but other very dense stars that are not dense enough to form a blackhole but aren't far from it. However, this light orbit is not stable: light circling on that sphere will eventually either fall in or escape outwards, so there will be no glowing "sphere of pure light". However, this sphere can cause odd visual effects, namely you can see distorted images of the sky around that are from photons that have circled near this sphere a few times.
Also I think this sphere is not the event horizon, but it is outside of it, but I am not sure of this (I think I don't even understand what the event horizon is exactly). – b_jonas 13:16, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
You're correct. At the distance where light moving in a circle around the hole stays in orbit, light moving away from the black hole can still escape. If you could stand there, the black hole would appear to cover exactly half of the sky. At the event horizon, on the other hand, no light can escape. A hypothetical observer standing motionless at the event horizon would see the black hole cover the entire sky, with the possible exception of a single point of light straight above. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:06, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
(Well, that is, if a) it was possible to stay motionless at the event horizon, and b) we could ignore all this weird stuff about space and time being relative. But you get the idea.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
What I don't understand is that the page I linked above claims that this sphere has a radius that's a constant multiply of the radius of the event horizon. But it also claims that dense neutron stars that aren't black holes could also have such a sphere. Don't these two claims contradict? – b_jonas 21:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
The radius at which light orbits is not the same as the Schwarzschild radius (the radius of the event horizon), but a constant multiple of it. Every mass has a Schwarzschild radius. If a mass is compressed inside its Schwarzschild radius, it becomes a black hole, but it is possible for it to be compressed inside the light-orbiting radius but still outside the Schwarzschild radius, so it has a photon sphere even though it's not a black hole. —Keenan Pepper 22:56, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
To be specific, it's exactly 3/2 the Schwarzschild radius. —Keenan Pepper 22:58, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. – b_jonas 20:48, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand how photons would orbit any further than right outside the event horizon. The event horizon is the point at which gravity exceeds the speed of light. So right outside that, they should be equal, causing a regular orbit. Or am I missing some relativistic consequences that render the classical model ineffective here? --Booch 17:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
You're making some invalid assumptions. You can't compare gravity and speed, because they have different units. At the event horizon, the escape velocity is the speed of light, but the orbital velocity and the escape velocity are not the same. There's no reason for them to be. —Keenan Pepper 19:22, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Note that if there's a ring/sphere of photons orbiting a black hole, you wouldn't "see" the ring. You can only see photons coming directly toward you, and these would be in orbit, never coming toward you. Unless, as pointed out above, they bounced off some other particles. But I'm sure you'd still see plenty of other photons coming into the black hole. And I suppose if you're at the exact center, every photon coming in would by that point would eventually be coming straight at you. --Booch 17:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Security vulnerability

In a typical software company (like Microsoft, Apple, Sun Microsystems, etc.), do the programmer(s) responsible for a security vulnerability (wrote the code that caused the vulnerability, that is) get punished or disciplined in some way? --61.94.149.59 07:28, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

There is an assumption in your question that all vulnerabilities are due to either malicious or unintentional errors by programmers. On the contrary, I think many vulnerabilities are inherent in the high-level design of a program. If programmers are asked to make an operating system that will execute programs on your computer which are downloaded off the internet, without your permission, this is an inherent vulnerability. Think of it as if you left your house key under the door mat in case somebody needed access to your house, like a firefighter. Obviously, anyone can find the key and gain access. StuRat 08:23, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
This is an excellent point -- many vulnerabilities are indeed "inherent", although this obviously does not necessarily mean that they were inevitable. And in the case of an operating system that performs the stupefyingly risky operation of "executing programs on your computer which are downloaded off the internet, without your permission", I think we could use a slightly different analogy. Here's one: instead of mailboxes, some houses have mail slots in the front door. Suppose that the builder of your house (and all the houses on your street) decided to make the "mail slot" two feet wide and three feet high, so that the mailman could deliver large parcels as well as just letters. And suppose that nobody realized (until 95% of the front doors in the world had these gigantic "mail slots") that it was possible for a person to crawl through them... Steve Summit (talk) 19:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
You can add a supplemental security system that denies access to people it regonizes as bad, but that still lets lots of bad people in which aren't recognized. Similarly, a virus-check program can only stop those viruses it recognizes. A more practical approach to security would be to ban all access to your computer to everyone you haven't specifically authorized to have access. StuRat 08:23, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Uh, I think I should be more specific. Actually, what I mean is security vulnerability caused by programming mistakes (e.g., incorrect authentication routines, unchecked buffer, etc.), not security risks in general. To be more specific, do someone in the company get punished for making mistakes in program code that turned into a security vulnerability? 61.94.149.59 08:55, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
As a general rule, there are computer companies that flood us with vulnerabilities that should never have been there in the first place, and there are computer companies you never hear in the news about vulnerabilities because we go 10 years or more between them having a flaw (IBM for example). This is because the latter have systems to catch vulnerabilities in development before the product goes to the customers, This requires extensive testing of the software, which adds to the cost of the product. Because the market demands cheapest possible products, the market gets what it pays for, products that have not been properly tested to make sure they have no security vulnerabilities. If the programmers that did the poor programming are no longer working at the place where they did the bad code, it is unlikely that the company will go after them, if it even knows who done it. The industry, that has won the market share war, has a dismal record of security standards, compared to in computer historical standards where quality was mission critical. User:AlMac|(talk) 09:10, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, note that when you open any software package you agree that the company will not be held responsible for any damage caused to you or your business even as a direct result of defects in their product. If car makers could be assured that they would not be sued, the car defect rate would be as high as the software defect rate. The lack of responsibility leads to, well, irresponsibility. StuRat 09:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
In any company, employees can make mistakes, sometimes very expensive or embarrassing ones. How companies deal with this is rightly a secret: between themselves and the employee, and generally dealt with case by case. Some companies punish those who make mistakes, but others have learned that this only encourages ingenuity in hiding them until they become more serious. In some companies, corporate embarrassment is severely punished, by sacking a senior person in charge. Software companies generally learn that if you sack every programmer who makes a mistake, then you won't have any programmers. Notinasnaid 11:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
As a computer programmer myself, I can tell you most of us would very much want to thouroughly test and fix our software, but management budgets and schedules don't allow this. So, blaming the programmers is a bit like blaming a homebuilder who you told to build you a mansion in a week for a thousand dollars. StuRat 11:50, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


Agree! Error is corporate made. Head, sales, boss and employees are on par with customers to tolerate errors.
If you want to get rid of this, try designing a product that customers shall pay its price, including enough time for reflexion about security and design before programming, and enough testing while programming and again after.
By the time, other companies have won the market, their product is cheaper, full of bugs, but! it was available before.
There is no fatality. Your product must show a high level of quality and, more, be in advance (techniques, marketing, design, features). Look around for such, maybe you purchased one and paid the price. --Harvestman 20:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How do solar sails work ?

I understand that light hits the sail and is reflected back off the sail. My question is how masslesss photons can exert any pressure on the sail. When I use F = ma to calculate the force, even if the acceleration is from the speed of light in one direction to the speed of light in the reverse direction, I still get a force of zero for a massless particle. What am I missing ?

There is a device with a similar function, a "fan" inside an evacuated glass container with one side of each blade painted black and the other white. The difference in reflectivity causes the fan to rotate when in the light. This might be a purer example of the effect I'm asking about, since solar sails will also catch particles in the solar wind which do have mass. StuRat 08:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

The "fan" (Crookes radiometer) seems to work on something completely different from the solar sail. The light mill needs gas particles to work (i.e. a partial vacuum, not a total vacuum). --AySz88^-^ 08:27, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
According to solar sail, the pressure comes from radiation pressure. Have a look at that article; it explains how it works. enochlau (talk) 08:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I've read that article, and it really didn't explain it, just gave a formula to find the strength:

It may be shown by electromagnetic theory, by quantum theory, or by thermodynamics, making no assumptions as to the nature of the radiation, that the pressure against a surface exposed in a space traversed by radiation uniformly in all directions is equal to 1/3 the total radiant energy per unit volume within that space.
For black body radiation, in equilibrium with the exposed surface, the energy density is, in accordance with the Stefan-Boltzmann law, equal to σT4/3c; in which σ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant, c is the speed of light, and T is the absolute temperature of the space. One third of this energy is equal to 6.305×10−17T4 J/m3K4, which is therefore equal to the pressure in pascals.

I'm really looking for an intuitive explanation. I suppose if it involves quantum mechanics or something else inherently non-intuitive, I will just have to accept it without understanding it. StuRat 09:09, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Photoelectric effect. It's not really the same context as a solar sail, but it ends up ejecting electrons (which bear mass) - so it is ultimately the same principle. F=ma is an incomplete formula: it is incompatible with quantum mechanics. I myself am searching for a better formula (I have a hunch that one exists) that will account for the force a photon exerts on a mass, but also compatible with classical mechanical situations. (ie. breaking down the "mass" into different components). Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 10:02, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Energy is mass in a different form. So if mass can propell something, energy should also be able to do that. But mass can only propell something when it has energy (which it then transfers to the object being moved). So energy is the only thing that is needed, I'd say. Which makes sense of course. What happens to a photon that hits a sail (or anything else for that matter)? Does it lose its energy=mass and thus get transformed into something else? I understand from photoelectric effect that photons (being electromagnetic radiation) knock electrons out of the material they hit. But then the sail would be 'eaten away'. DirkvdM 10:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Having electron constantly leaving the material does seem like a problem, unless they are somehow created by the photons which hit. I didn't think the photon lost any energy, but just changed it's direction, like a perfectly elastic ball bouncing off a wall. Also, I don't see energy as equal to mass but rather as something that can theoretically be converted into mass. As far as I know, this doesn't happen in a solar sail, however. StuRat 10:22, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I thought about it a bit more, and I suppose losing electrons at a sizable portion of the speed of light would accelerate the object to a similar portion of the speed of light (although this might take thousands of years). A large positive charge would seem to build up on the solar sail, however, as it becomes deficient in electrons. I would think this charge would build to a point where it would suck any ejected electrons right back down. StuRat 10:43, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
It'll probably generate current and the electrons simply go to another part of the sail (which then the current replaces the electrons the metal atoms lost). The energy would then probably eventually contribute to the driving force on the sail anyway. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 15:40, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't see how this solves the problem of the sail taking on a net positive charge and thus a huge attraction for any electrons which manage to get free. StuRat 20:51, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Solar cells use the photoelectric effect and don't build up a huge static charge or something, so I assume it doesn't happen to solar sails. One thing I want to ask though is, does photosynthesis use the photoelectric effect, (roughly, except with a light-sensitive pigment), or is it something else? Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 06:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
The difference is that solar sails are in a vacuum, or near vacuum, so can't easily replace the missing electrons with more from the environment around them. StuRat 08:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
As I was aware, photovoltaic cells replace their electrons with the current behind it (it merely passes on an electron, and receiving one back, and the true flow of movement is energy) when it is generated. I would assume solar sails would undergo the same process. Elle vécu heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 22:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
In order to have any thrust, the electrons must be ejected from the solar sail. If so, positive charge builds up, if not, no thrust. StuRat 02:18, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
The problem is that I think the relationship between mass and energy in correspondence to force isn't e=mc^2, but something entirely different, based on the entire premise that say, a body that isn't moving doesn't bear any force anyhow, but of course, holds energy. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 10:23, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
It is true that photons have zero mass (zero rest mass, to be precise), but they do have momentum. This allows you to use conservation of momentum to calculate the radiation pressure. You may think that momentum implies mass, but physicists say that this is not true (see "Does light have mass?" on Physics FAQ). --Heron 12:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm just a lowly engineering science-type guy, but this just F=Ma with the solar particles, and perhaps radiation (the wave-particle thingie). Solar sails are a thing of the past, I think good old ion engines with nuclear power are way better! --Zeizmic 17:10, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Obsolete before they have even been made to work yet ? StuRat 20:51, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
The same might happen to ion engines and anything that follows (for quite some time). These things would take so incredbly long to get to the even nearest star (if that is the goal) that before they're well underway a better technology will have been developed that will over take them. Only when we've got a technology that would take the craft to its destination in a few decades will it be worthwhile to actually send it. Which is not a very strong incentive to develop anything at all, alas. DirkvdM 12:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Yea, Voyager might be more interesting as a time-capsule than to communicate with aliens. When we go pick it up in a century or two it will be an interesting item for some musuem. StuRat 02:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

The problem comes from thinking of rest mass as the real mass. The relativistic mass is the real mass in terms of actual behavior. But it varies according to the relative speed of the object so isn't as useful in terms of teaching students or of defining invariable qualities of particles, so rest mass gets called the real mass and the actual behavior of objects becomes more mysterious. But's its easier to teach and they aren't going to become physicists anyway... WAS 4.250 03:11, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] hEARing

I believe we have body activity patterns we have subconsiously learned to ignore.

What causes me to intermittently hear my heart beating out of my right ear? (I am assuming that is what I am hearing.) Is that a symptom of some ear problem?

I went for months without this distraction, then had it on and off a couple days, typically hald a dozen short sessions of perhaps 1/4 hour worth, then a rest for a while, then another session, and now I have peace and quiet again. I not remember my left ear hearing this in ages.

I will be age 62 this Feb 8 and fear that as our bodies grow older, they develop new aliments. I sure hope this nuisance is not going to be another of those new ailments, I will have to learn to live with. User:AlMac|(talk) 09:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Just about everyone could hear their own heartbeat in complete silence. Hearing your heartbeat at normal background sound levels may be a sign of high blood pressure, however. I suggest you get a BP cuff and take your BP the next time this happens. Also take some "baseline" readings when you don't hear this sound, to see what your normal reading is. Spikes in BP may be caused by certain conditions, such as sodium sensitive hypertension. It would be a good idea to consult a physician, as untreated high BP can be quite dangerous. StuRat 09:32, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm no expert at this at all, but isn't high blood pressure a symptom rather than an ailment? For example for blood clots? To continue with this thought, I can imagine that if a tiny clot would end up in a small blood vessel near the inner ear that could have such an effect. A remedy might then be taking aspirin (an anticoagulant). Or alcohol, for a happier alternative :) . DirkvdM 10:29, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
No, I think hypertension, AKA, high blood pressure, may be considered an ailment by itself. It could also be viewed as a result of bad diet, obesity, age, etc., and a cause of things like stroke. StuRat 10:47, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Have you held a finger to your neck to see if your pulse has the same rhythm as the beat in your ear? They could be unrelated. Black Carrot 23:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Why would they be unrelated ? I don't think he has grown a 2nd heart in his ear, LOL. StuRat 08:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
What else could cause a pulsating noise (at roughly the heart's frequency)? I can't think of anything. Very slow brainwaves (f=1Hz)? :) DirkvdM 12:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Brainwaves? Anyway, it's an easy enough thing to check, and it would make a big difference if it turned out not to be on the same rhythm. Black Carrot 13:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
It has not happened again since shortly before Black Carrot's suggestion. StuRat is perfectly correct to imply that I may have a problem with over-weight and bad diet and I forget the other thing. This picture of me is from a few years ago. I have put on a bit of weight since then. User:AlMac|(talk) 07:08, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] spiders : how do they build some nets?

I need to make a question to a spiders expert because I need information on how some spiders build their nets, everybody speaks about nets and spiders but nobody actually explain how some extraordinary patterns are made! I saw 9 metres nets long in orizontal direction with nothing in between!!! How can they build it???We use elicopters but they do not! waiting for answer Raffaele Serafini Veneto-Europe

I think you mean webs. There are also some spiders which make portable nets, but I don't think that's what you're asking. Each species has a different technique, but here's a general overview of web design:
1) First they drop from the highest point and leave a non-sticky line behind. They then anchor this at the lowest point, too.
2) They then climb back up the line and repeat another line but anchor it at the center of the orignal line as well as at the top and bottom. This new line might be rotated, say 30 degrees, about the center from the first line.
3) They repeat this until they have all the axial lines in non-sticky silk.
4) They then connect some cross supports with non-sticky thread, maybe 2 or 3 concentric sets.
5) Now it's time to add the sticky silk in a radial pattern between the supports.
6) Depending on the spider, they might go to the center or to the edge to wait for a victim. Once they feel vibrations on the non-sticky lines, the follow them out to the prey and kill it.
StuRat 11:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Do they use those portable nets for their shopping? :)
There is a spider that carries a net around with it's front two legs, and wraps it around it's prey, as opposed to having a fixed web. StuRat 02:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
The biggest web I ever ran into (literally) was in Australia, where I went to the side of the road for a piss and bounced off something. Which turned out to be a huge web (and was still intact after me bouncing of it!). I didn't wait to see the spider as you may understand. That was about 3 m across. But 9 m? The biggest Web of them all, however, is of course World Wide. :) DirkvdM 12:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and then there is another little bit of trivia about spider webs, namely how they perform under the influence of several drgus. Cafeine and sleeping pills (opposites, ironically) turn out to be the most disruptive drugs. See [32], [33] and [34]. But I'm getting a feeling we've already had a similar thread. DirkvdM 12:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Some spiders can also spool a thread of sticky silk into the air, and air currents will carry it for some distance until the thread catches on an object. This is how many spiders stretch long, single threads across a horizontal distance. Small spiders can also "balloon" on silk parachutes that float on the wind. TheSPY 16:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Caves

Section title added
WHICH IS THE OLDEST CAVE IN THE WORLD`````````

Please don't use all CAPITAL LETTERS; it looks you are shouting. I don't think that there is any 'oldest' cave; many caves have existed since prehistoric times. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 14:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Probably since the Earth was formed too. Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 14:49, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
It's possible he means the oldest cave that's used as a tourist attraction. Black Carrot 20:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Er, you mean, the cave that's been a tourist attraction for the longest time? =P —Keenan Pepper 23:08, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Possibly. Caves do grow over time, though, they don't all date back to the formation of the earth. They can be formed by underground streams, for instance, sweeping away more and more material over the years until a set of caverns forms. Also, not all caves start out open to the air. So, they have at least four birthdays: the day they became big enough to be considered caves, the day a hole to the surface opened(possibly the same), the day they were discovered, and the day people started making money off them. --Black Carrot 00:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)


to fresh users : don't try adding ``````'s to sign. Just tildes. It is on some different key or uses some combination with the shift, ctrl ot alt key. '`````Harvestman 19:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] sound

if all objects create sounds by vibration then what is doing the vibrations?

Not a true assumption. Could you clarify? --Zeizmic 15:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Please see sound. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:51, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Any part of an object can vibrate. That vibration pushes on the air/water/etc, which makes that vibrate. The vibration of the air makes your ear drum vibrate, which is how you hear. Black Carrot 20:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Some other form of energy creates the vibrations initially. For example, during an explosion chemical potential energy is changed into various other forms of energy, including sound vibrations. StuRat 20:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

If a solid object gets hit by something it will move with it ('go with the flow'). If it 'hangs loose' (sorry about the analogy) it will fly off. But if it is fixed somehow it will bounce back. Until it reaches the furthest point in the other direction, upon which it will move back again. Etc etc. If the object and the fixation point are both sufficiently stiff this back and forth movement will go on for quite some time, enough to stabilise in a regular vibration (frequency). The air around it will then start to move with it. Which in turn pushes the air around that, causing the wave to propagate and eventually possibly reach an ear. And if the frequency is between (roughly) 20 and 20 thousand Hz (vibrations) we will perceive it as a sound. Hope this is what you meant to ask. :) Oh, and the thing that hits the object might itself be a sound wave. An object will have a tendency to vibrate at a certain frequency (or discrete multiples of it). If the sound that hits it has such a frequency the object will start to vibrate along (sympathetic vibration or resonance). DirkvdM 12:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HTML tag for verdana text?

I'd like to make the text on a HTML page appear in Verdana (obviously only when installed on the PC of the viewer). '' and '' don't work, and a Google search yields nothing. Can anyone help me?

It's been many years since I last touched the <font> tag but the first should work, although you might like to capitalise the V in Verdana. It is now better to use the <span> tag as follows: <span style="font-family:Verdana">Text</span>. enochlau (talk) 15:53, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
(After edit conflict...) There's no HTML tag for Verdana, but you could use CSS:
 <span style="font-family:verdana">Your text</span>
Putting in an alternate font for users without Verdana would be a good idea too:
 <span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Your text</span>
Or if you plan to use Verdana in a couple places, e.g. in the title of the page and in each paragraph of content, you'd be better of using straight CSS without the style tag. In the <head> of your HTML page:e
  <style type="text/css"><!--
  h1 { font-family:verdana }
  p { font-family: verdana }
  //--></style>
and then code the body of your HTML page as usual:
  <h1>Page title</h1>
  <p>This is some text that will appear in Verdana.</p>
  <p>Here is some more text also in Verdana.</p>
Hope that helps, David Iberri (talk) 16:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, but none of those seem to help; I should have mentioned that the text I want to Verdana-ise is in a table -- meaning I want the whole table to be in verdana. FONT FACE works if I start it during a cell, ie ''<td><font face="verdana">Red motorcar</td>'', but when I write /TD it automatically closes the FONT FACE tag, too (meaning I'd have to type it around 250-300 times).

Then wrap the whole table on a div:
<div style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif"><table>
 ...
 </table></div>
Don't forget the "sans-serif" part, which is used when the Verdana font is not installed. --cesarb 16:38, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Or define the <td> tag as Verdana:
 <style type="text/css">
 td { font-family:verdana }
 </style>
enochlau (talk) 17:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I think the answer you are looking for is: there isn't a reliable way to set all of a table's font faces with one tag using just HTML. I believe in Internet Explorer you can put the entire TABLE element inside of a FONT tag, but I don't think this works in most browsers. Instead you have to either set the FONT for each bit of text in the table or you have to use CSS. --Fastfission 17:16, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
  • You may find a better answer to your question in Wikibooks. Just check here. --JB Adder | Talk 05:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What?!

What kind of a sick freak would deface a nativity? Do they have no respect for christ at all? Is this a treatable mental illness? Or are some people just beyond hope?--63.22.111.181 17:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe. --Fangz 19:32, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Could you be more specific? Who defaced what nativity when, and how? Most likely, it is not a mental illness, and as such does not require treatment. If they defaced a display, it seems reasonable to suppose that no, they don't respect the person being honored by it. And I suspect many people don't define 'hope' the way you're using it here. --Black Carrot 20:21, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
We live in a world of people with a wide range of impaired judgement, like kids who turn over gravestones in cemetary of some sob-group of society they not like, for reasons they cannot explain to anyone who not share their dislike. Often this is a problem of a lack of education, or an unwillingness to be educated on diversity topics. Start off with the assumption, that for some people, nothing is sacred. It then follows that they see nothing wrong with terrorism, hijacking airliners, murder, drug abuse, respect for other people's religious icons. User:AlMac|(talk) 20:47, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Not intending to start anything here, and I agree that it's a shame and disrepsectful, but knocking over some mannequins is a very common form of youthful vandalism, can be hilarious, and is not on a par with any of the things you mentioned. And drug abuse? I live in a town with some very socially conscious hippies who would take exception to being lumped into a category with terrorists, or even nativity-defilers. Point is, this is not the place to debate morality. The questions asked are not answerable, and this whole part ought to be deleted. Just the facts, ma'am. Bethefawn 1418, 8.1.06
Drug abuse in this context? (What is the context anyway?) What does that mean? Forcing drugs down other people's throats? And how many questions can I ask in a row? DirkvdM 12:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
There are some who feel the use of public dollars to display items in support of any one religion is wrong, and might vandalize it for that reason. I think it's wrong, but wouldn't go that far. StuRat 21:22, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
What does "defacing a nativity" mean? deeptrivia (talk) 13:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
It could mean vandalize a painting that represents Jesus, his mother, and so on, just after birth. --Harvestman 19:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Fenwick (Kevin Bacon) in Diner. And Larry David defiles one (by macking on Mary) in an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm. More pertinently, I wish they wouldn't keep introducing these new-fangled subjects into the Science curriculum... chocolateboy 08:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weather

Why does summer in Ontario on Lake Superior feel hotter than in the prairies even though the temperature is not as low?--64.231.193.87 18:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Humidity and/or wind speed ? StuRat 20:32, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, if the temperature is "not as low", that means it's hotter, which is why it would feel that way. GeeJo (t) (c) • 04:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hydrated to anhydrous

What are some ways to change a hydrated salt anhydrous?

Heat it. Don't heat it too much though, as that will cause the salt to decompose. --Shanedidona 19:24, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Some salts have greater affinity for water than others. I think that if you stored the hydrated salt together with anhydrous, high affinity salt, eventually most of your original salt would be anhydrous. ike9898 20:16, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Miscellaneous Questions

I have several science related Miscellaneous questions:

1) Bullets travel faster than sound, right? So why don't we experiance a sonic boom, something like two bangs one for the gunpowder and another shortly after for breaking the sound barrier?

The bullet breaks the sound barrier while still inside the gun barrel. StuRat 20:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't know a lot about sonic booms, but believe you only hear one as the object passes you. So, if there was one, the person firing the gun wouldn't hear it. As the bullet passes someone, if there was an audible sonic boom, it would be heard before the gun firing. The boom reaches you when the bullet reaches you, and the bullet is traveling faster than the sound of the gun. But would there be enough of a time delay between them to hear the difference? --Black Carrot 20:43, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
The first 20 minutes of Saving private Ryan are supposed to be very realistic and there the soldiers hear a whooshing or whistling sound when the bullets pass by. Maybe the bullet's speed drops below the sound barrier after a while. Or maybe it is too small to make a noticeable sound. DirkvdM 13:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
You do, but "crack" as the bullet passes the sound barrier generally blends with the report of the rifle and gunpowder explosion itself to be indistinguishable. Remember, the bullet stops accelerating the moment the hot gases cease to act on it (i.e. milliseconds after it leaves the barrel), so the two events are closer together than your ear can distinguish. It's a major problem when trying to create a quieter weapon, so supressed guns either use special subsonic ammunition or ports in the barrel that reduce the velocity of normal ammunition below the speed of sound. The sonic boom is much less than that created by an airplane simply because the bullet is several orders of magnitude smaller and therefore displaces and compresses much less air as it passes its own shockwave. Night Gyr 01:34, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

2) Would there be a light barrier eg. in theory if an object of some sort exceeds the speed of light (although not possible) would there be some kind of explosion of light as it build up aroung the object, this is all merely theoretical.

Actually, it is possible (though not in a vacuum). See Cherenkov radiation. GeeJo (t) (c) • 04:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

3) Is 100% insulation of an object possible? eg. a means of an object forever retaining constant temperature? and on the other extreme is 100% heat conductivity possible?

Nothing can be 100% insulating. - Akamad 01:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Aerogel comes close, though. Anyone know the cost per cubic meter for it? Tzarius 10:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Nothing is pure or absolute. Nothing is ever 100% anything. (This could turn into a very long philosophical discussion :) .) DirkvdM 13:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I'll call your bluff: Bullsh**! What now? I didn't think so! ;) Black Carrot 00:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I think there are many absolutes, like absolute zero. StuRat 01:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't that article be called 'zero temperature'? It suggests that there are no other absolute zeros. I'm going to defend that there are none at all, but that's philosophical. In our reality they make perfect sense. Like classical mechanics still makes perfect sense for everyday life, even though modern physics has proven it wrong. Anyway....
You may define zero temperature and use it as a basis for scientific calculations because that happens to work, but can you achieve absolute motionlessness (which it really means) in the real world? Take distance. There, you can even go into the negative numbers, but that doesn't represent any real thing. Same with 0 m. That is a mathematically completely sound thing. But nothing in the real world can be 0 m long - it wouldn't exist (in our dimensions anyway). Mathematics is the only area that has absolute truths (the philosophical bit I was really thinking about), but only because it defines its own world. Which we can use to analyse the real world, but that doesn't make it equal to reality. Actually, I think mathematics is the formalisation of the way we see the world. We've figured out how are spectacles work, but that does not mean we can take them off. So we can never see the real world and therefore not find any absolute truths that might be out there, except the ones we impose on it.
See also thinking pc and quantum mechanics below.
Black Carrot, you didn't think what? I only go through this page once every morning, so don't expect instant replies from me. And did you mean to say 'bullshit' perchance? If so, why didn't you say it? And if you don't want to say it, then why do you (halfheartedly)? Make up your mind. :) DirkvdM 06:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Absolute zero is its name. There are several systems of temperature measurement, and there used to be more, so this is in comparison to them. 0C is the freezing point of water, 0F is god knows what, and 0K is the absolute zero point of temperature. And I believe it is in fact possible to reach absolute zero eventually, through radiation of heat. Feel free to correct me on that last point.
0m does represent something, as the result of a sum of lengths or vectors. It represents a lack of resultant motion. So, if you move 1m forward, 3m to your left, 4m to your right, 1m back, and 1m to your left on a flat floor, you have moved 0m total. True, it won't be exactly 0m if none of the other measurements were exact, but that's a fault of the precision of measurement in general, not a problem with the practical concept of 0.
There are plenty of things that can be 100%. 100% of my class is in the age range 16-19, 100% of the people in this room right now are of the species homo sapiens, 100% of the particles in the square foot of air in front of my face are less than 1 inch across, I have occasionally gotten 100% of the answers on my homework correct. True, there are some things that can't be made 100%, like (at least for now) it's impossible to keep the human race 100% male for very long, but there are some things that undeniably can. That's the philosophical side of my argument. The actual wording was chosen in the wild, overpowering excitement of the moment (irony, in case you were wondering), and was an imitation of the sh**-talking I've occasionally heard. The asterisks were because we're supposed to humor those who think the young people viewing this page don't know and/or shouldn't see such words in full. It wasn't in the least half-hearted. Holla back, yo. --Black Carrot 20:27, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I prefer logical language, so to me 'absolute zero' should mean just that, a mathematical entity. If it's already been reserved (in practise) for absolute zero of one specific unit, that's too bad. I dare you to find a source that this absolute zero (or any other one) has ever been achieved. An absolute lack of temperature would mean total motionless. Where there is no motion and no time and not anything. It is (by definition?) non-existent.
As for 0m, you already point in the direction of one flaw. You'd have to make the measurements absolutely precise. With mathematical precision. Try finding measuring stick and/or method that can achieve that. If you use something material then that consists of atoms. Which have size. So the measuring goes in steps and can only be absolutely precise if the measurement you wish coincides precisely with a physical measuring length (a chance that approaches zero). But what I meant is that nothing can be 0m. Or 1m for that matter. Those are mathematical values that do not exist in reality.
About the 100% examples. I can't get the counterargumentation right in my head (though it's in there somewhere) and I don't have much time now, but it's got to do with you defining the entities you measure (as in mathematics).
Holla back, yo? That's a lingo I don't talk. :) What does it mean? DirkvdM 10:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Logical language? oxymoron :) Seriously, though, there's no reason the phrase can't be used for lots of things, if that's the way people want it. Just look at all the disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. Venus has about 25 meanings, but nobody has trouble using it. Absolute zero doesn't really work as a name for the mathematical representation of nothing, though, because that already has a shorter name - zero. As for its practical existence: I don't think it has been achieved yet, and I would trust someone who works with it to tell me it can't be. However, I am not at all certain based on what little I know of it that it is impossible. It seems that, if matter is capable of radiating away heat in the form of electromagnetic energy (which it is), and if energy is quantized (removing the possiblity of asymptotic loss of heat), a particle left on its own, with no source of additional energy, would sooner or later radiate away all of its own. A lack of temperature BTW, according to the article, doesn't exactly mean total motionlessness, and I very much doubt it is equivalent to timelessness.
As I said, the practical problem of exact measurement (a very real difference between pure math and applied math) is not the issue. The question is whether 0m exists, and it does. It's hard to say whether any particular resultant motion equals 0m, but it exists. As to length, to say that nothing can be 0m long is to define the term. If I tell you there are zero people in the room other than me, that is an exact statement of amount. If I tell you there are zero square meters of cloth left to work with, although that would be an odd way of putting it, it would still be true. I wouldn't mean there might be anything between .000001 and -.000001 square meters left, I mean we've actually used it all up and need to go out for more. To say that no thing can be 1m long is plain wrong, unless it turns out that the universe exists in discrete intervals, of which 1m is not a multiple. If you're saying that the symbols 0 and m, when put together, represent nothing but an abstract concept, it seems you miss the point of putting them together in the first place.
Take your time. We've got a few days before this moves to the archives.
Quite elementary, my dear DirkvdM. You see, 'Holla' is a phonetic rendering of the word holler in an English subdialect referred to by some as 'blackinese'. To 'holla' or to 'holla back' means to respond, possibly later on by phone, and 'yo' is a barely meaningful word that need not be translated, like est-ce que in French. It is either a corruption of the English word 'you' or a loud nonsense syllable similar to the British 'oy', intended either to get someone's attention or as a greeting(similar to 'hi'), depending on context. In this case, any or all could fit. Here, it mainly serves to provide emphasis, and cement the sentence's mock-ethnic origins. In total, including connotation and idiom, the phrase 'Holla back, yo' can be roughly translated as "Get back to me." --Black Carrot 20:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)Black Carrot 00:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Well let me holler at you once again, dear Carrot.
"... with no source of additional energy, ..." Ah, but there always is one, unless the surrounding material (!?) is also at 0 K. Which begs the question. You might eliminate the surrounding material by suspending it in vacuum (absolute vacuum ??), but still holding it together somehow. With what? If not matter, then energy. Without transferring any energy to the material? Ultimately only an absolute vacuum would have no motion. But that's nothing (by definition).So doesn't exist. Which is why absolute vacuum can't exist.
The zero cloth and zero people don't exist, do they? All you say is that something does not exist. Which is my point (sounds a bit lame, but true nonetheless).
The universe does indeed exist in discrete intervals, or so quantum mechanics tells us, I believe. But that's less of a principal matter than this (the theory could be wrong). But you still can't have anything that is precisely 1 m long, in terms of mathematical precision. You may get incredibly close (by human standards, but that's also not a principal perspective), but that's not what this is about. I could always add a few decimals and demand you get that much closer. The point is I could always do that.
About the 100% thing. Your mentioning a discrete universe gave me a different angle. By defining people and such as entities you introduce 'discreteness'. You define discrete entities and that makes it work. But these only make sense to you. Well, most of the time anyway. Let me use an old example in philosophy about a ship (I forgot the name). Everytime a part was replaced someone kept it. After a time all the parts have been replaced and the guy puts them all together. The traditional question is which is the original ship. But I ask how many ships there are. The concept of entity has broken down. It's an illusion that 'works' most of the time in real life. But that does not make it a principal thing in reality. Hmmm, stillnot satisfied with that explanation. There has to be better way to say this. But maybe you start to catch my drift (speaking of ships :) ). DirkvdM 11:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Don't you think you're stretching a bit with some of that? Why must it be 'held together'? I was thinking of a lonely atom, floating around in space, where it shouldn't be in the least difficult to isolate it from its surroundings. And emptiness, unless the entire universe ceases to exist, has a very definite existence, as the lack, in that area, of all those materials we hold so dear. It's like saying a hole in the ground doesn't exist just because, if the entire world were a hole, there's be nothing left.
No, your point is, "Those are mathematical values that do not exist in reality." This refers to both things in the previous sentence: 0 and 1. The measurements 0m and 1m, however, do exist. One indicates a lack of whatever's being measured, the other indicates the presence of 1 meter's length of it.
That's true(as best I know), and irrelevant. I said above, "As I said, the practical problem of exact measurement [of length] (a very real difference between pure math and applied math) is not the issue. The question is whether 0m exists, and it does." You had added in the 1m yourself, drawing a parallel where it turns out none exists. As a matter of fact, reading over all of it again, I think the 0m thing itself was only introduced as a parallel to 0K. However, our discussion thus far seems to have revealed that they aren't similar in the way you'd hoped.
That story reminds me of the tin man from the wizard of Oz. His limbs got hacked off one by one (accidents caused by a witch, if I recall) and replaced with metal ones. Finally, both his arms, both his legs, his head, and his torso were all metal. Of course, in that example it's easy to tell what's wrong. A better example might be one from either God's Debris or The Religion War, involving the battles over Jerusalem. The difficulty was defining what about that particular point in the universe made it special. The position? That changes drastically by the second. The dirt? Surely there's enough of that to go around. However, I feel neither captures what you're trying to say. I think I've got a handle on it, though, and despite its good points, I think it's totally wrong. Tell me if this helps:
  • Mathematics, though it's defined by us (therefore self-consistent), and though quite a bit can be implied by it that can't actually be done in the real world, the real world isn't alone in that. There are plenty of things implied by one part of mathematics that even another branch of mathematics can't handle, which is why we have so many. Trying to describe the fraction 1/3 in the form of a decimal, for instance, or trying to describe sin x using only non-trigonometric functions. Both can be infinitely approached, neither is possible. There are many other examples.
  • There are plenty of places where mathematics does sync up with the real world perfectly, which is why we use it. There are plenty of places where 100% is perfectly achievable, and certainly at least exists, especially in the fields that gave birth to it, rudimentary statistics and probability. Ex: If I flip a coin, there is a roughly 50 per cent chance it will land on heads. If, however, I drop a red ball, there is an exactly 100% chance it will land on its red side. If I drop it over and over again, there is no doubt it will land on red 100 per 100 times. --Black Carrot 23:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)



I don't know if this is true but I seem to remember hearing that some superconductors can be perfect heat conductors. – b_jonas 20:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

4) What are quarks made of? And then what is that made of and then that, etc?

I think quarks are made of strings, according to current theory. I don't think current theory goes any deeper than that. StuRat 20:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
By definition (if you take the word literally) the smallest building block is the atom. DirkvdM 13:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

5) What effect does the combinations of quarks have on a particle eg. rather than 2 down and 1 up two bottom and a top, and if i had a rod of iron one made of the first type of neutrons and then another with the second kind would there be a visual, chemical or physical difference?

7121989 19:55, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

In answer to question 2. When you are talking about the sound barrier, its the speed of sound in a particular media. When talking about light, the speed of light in material media is of course much lesser than that in vaccum. This lesser value can be crossed. Cherenkov radiation is electromagnetic radiation emitted when a charged particle passes through an insulator at a speed greater than that of light in the medium. The characteristic "blue glow" of nuclear reactors is due to Cherenkov radiation. It is named after Pavel Alekseyevich Cherenkov, the 1958 Nobel Prize winner who was the first to rigorously characterize it. --Sayanchak 20:22, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
In answer to question 3, 100% insulation of an object isn't possible. Energy can be conveyed through matter by conduction, and through vacuum carried by photons (radiative transfer). 100% heat conductivity is possible, depending on exactly what is meant by the term. Superfluids like liquid helium are perfect conductors of heat; in their superfluid state it is impossible to set up a temperature gradient within the fluid. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
To answer question 5, the combination of quarks defines the type of particle. By definition, a neutron contains one up and two down quarks. A particle made up of one top and two bottom quarks–while still being of neutral charge–would be a very different beast. (Much more massive, and very short-lived.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] tornados

What makes the sky change to a yellow-green hue often when a tornado is in the area? I can't seem to find any information on this . Is it a change in the electrical charges ? thank you.

  • It's the water vapor, does the same thing during a plain thunderstorm, just acts like a filter for the sunlight--63.22.53.193 21:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
After searching both Google and HowStuffWorks for the terms 'tornado green sky', I'm prepared to answer this question in full: Nobody knows. There are quite a few theories floating around, including
  • It's just like an extreme sunset(which can have a green layer), the water-heavy air combined with the right time of day refract light farther than usual.
  • It's the vegetation that's been pulled up by the tornados (made up by some guy on a message board)
  • It's a sign of heavy hail. The hail refracts the light differently from most other things, and so gives different signs, namely a green tint to the clouds and sky.
  • Something indistinct about electricity.
There seems to be some agreement, however, on under what circumstances it shows up. It shows up with heavy storms. Some claim it shows up with tornados, some say it shows up with hail, but everyone agrees it is connected in some way to especially dangerous storms. For myself, I've only ever experienced it once (luckily, my dad recognized it and got us inside), and then, it came with everything. --Black Carrot 21:38, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] properties of sand

how will sand effect the pace at which water freezes in a 0 degrees celcius freezer?

lauren--67.189.253.185 22:45, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, there will be less water to freeze per volume (or weight), so a liter of sand-water mixture should freeze faster than a liter of pure water. The sand needs to be cooled too, of course, but it won't release any heat of fusion at 0°C. (Of course, if your freezer is at exactly 0°C, the water may or may not freeze at all. The presence of sand shouldn't noticeably affect the freezing point, although it will effectively prevent supercooling.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 22:59, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, I believe sand is a good insulator, so will slow the rate at which the water temp drops to freezing. Thus, it will take longer for the center to freeze in the sand/water mixture. The sand will provide multiple nucleation sites, too, so the ice is likely to contain more crystal cells. StuRat 08:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
From what I can tell by Googling (such as [35]), the thermal conductivity of rock (which is what sand actually is, when there's no air between the grains to act as an insulator) is typically somewhere between those of water (0.6 W/K m) and ice (2.2 W/K m). So it probably depends on what kind of sand it is, really. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 08:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I would say sand is basically small particles of glass, or silicon dioxide. However, the insulating effect is due not to the specific material, but due to the elimination of convection, which would leave the less efficient conduction as the only method of heat transfer (the third type, radiation, has little effect at the small temperature differentials being considered here). StuRat 10:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ice & Water

Which cools a drink faster, water and ice or just ice?

Do you mean putting ice (and water) into the drink, or surrounding the container with ice? If it's the latter, water and ice would cool it faster. Water will ensure that the entire surface of the container is maintained effectively at zero degrees, while if there's only ice, there will be air pockets left. While the trapped air will still be at zero degrees away from the container, it would be at a slightly higher temperature at the container surface. Basically, the overall convection coefficient would be lower than the ice+water case, and cooling will be less effective. Conduction is also much better with water than with air. deeptrivia (talk) 23:49, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
A mixture of crushed ice and salt is used in an ice cream churn to cool the ice cream very fast. —Keenan Pepper 00:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, this is an engineering question! If you want to cool your beer in a tub faster, do you just pour on ice, or do you add water as well? Every engineer knows that you just add crushed ice; you do not bother with adding tap water. Dropping in a giant ice block tends to smash the bottles. --65.92.79.213 01:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. Water would increase the contact area, as mentioned above, and thus increase the cooling rate. Only if you could crush the ice to the size of water molecules (in which case it would be water) would this effect be absent. StuRat 08:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Wait would it really be (liquid) water? If so, it would be liquid water below its freezing point, and would undergo a thermally identifiable melting point as it warmed. Hmmmmm... — Knowledge Seeker দ 09:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
By crushing the ice that finely, you'd be adding enough energy to it to melt (and possibly vaporize) it. So yes. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 09:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't seem to me that you'd have to raise its temperature that much. What if you cooled the ice first to a very very cold temperature and then very carefully and slowly crushed it? Inside a giant cooler? — Knowledge Seeker দ 10:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
The previous poster referred to adding tap water. In most places that would be well above the freezing point, and would certainly reduce the cooling effect on the beer at least at first, as the melting ice would absorb heat from the tap water first. However, it would be different if the water was already chilled to the freezing point and the ice well below. Then the water would only serve to conduct heat between the beer and the ice, and would increase cooling. (Disclaimer: I have not tried the experiment.) --Anon, 09:00 UTC, January 9.

Still, it sounds like a great experiment! --Zeizmic 13:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I saw on a tv show once (it might have been "Mythbusters") that the fastest way to cool drinks was to use a certain kind of fire extinguisher on them (while the drinks are in a bucket or other container). Other than that, I'd say that crushed ice and salt would probably be your best bet. Flea110 22:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
If you want to cool beer cans in a tub fast, you should add ice, water, and salt. The salt will cause the water to get dramatically colder, due to the Freezing-point depression. --BluePlatypus 10:08, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] January 9

[edit] Vocabulary on airships.

I am currently working on a translation from English to French, parts of which are about airships. I encounter some terminology issues about the parts of an airship ; I would be very pleased if someone helped me to find a good synthesis about it. For instance, a chart with the names of the different parts would be very useful, because I would be able to compare it with a French chart. Thank you for your help. --Eutrot 02:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Good restaurant to have onboard an airship...Blimpie's. StuRat 08:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
In the absence of a chart, what words are you interested in? --Anon, 09:00 UTC, January9

User:AlMac|(talk) 11:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding mobile browsing

Should we have a html enabled phone to access all sites available on the web on mobile phone? I assume html enabled phones are costly. (?) Should we must have either WAP or html to browse websites? Cant we browse through GPRS? (Please reply in detail if you can) (Thanks in advance for answering)

A couple years ago, it was too expensive and CPUs weren't fast enough in sizes small enough to fit in a phone, to be able to have enough power to interpret HTML easily. So they came up with a simpler format called WAP. I don't think that caught on all that well. Mainly because CPUs got smaller, faster, and cheaper (see Moore's Law) enough so that it's now common to have decent HTML interpreters on high-end phones. Soon most phones will likely be HTML-capable, due to continuing price/performance improvements. Full HTML support allows users to go to any web site, instead of just mobile-enabled sites. Which makes it more desirable on a phone than WAP. --Booch 18:19, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About AOL

I recently read that AOL is still the No.1 ISP in USA. But just want to know whether all of its dial-up customers have speeds less than 56 kbps? Does the Aol's 20 million subscribers include ISDN? Is there any other dial-up faster than 56 kbps?

AOL doesn't offer dialup services faster than 56K. Broadband users access AOL over their existing Internet connection; AOL does not act as their access conduit. To the best of my knowledge, AOL does not offer ISDN services. Significantly, not all AOL subscribers connect to AOL over dialup, so total subscriber numbers do not reflect actual dialup usage. Adrian Lamo 03:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hot body radiation

What power does hot to cold radiation have vs distance? I know that is not linear (twice as far = twice as much) but I don't know which power. hydnjo talk 04:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Your question is a little unclear but EM radiation falls off with the square of the distance. So if you move twice as far away from a source, it appears a fourth of what it used to be. enochlau (talk) 04:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
That's exactly the question that I'm asking, I thought it was the fourth power vs distance. Am I way off base with this? --hydnjo talk 04:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it's the fourth power. It follows the Inverse-square law. enochlau (talk) 04:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Obviously it's inverse square. Just think of maintaining a constant heat flux over the surface of sphere of radius r. P1*(4*pi*r1^2) = P2*(4*pi*r2^2) where P is the power intensity per unit area deeptrivia (talk) 04:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
It's 4th power to the temperature of radiation (H = esAT4.) Maybe that's what was confusing you. deeptrivia (talk) 05:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
That's exactly what I was misremembering. Thanks, hydnjo talk 19:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
See Stefan-Boltzmann law and Newton's law of cooling too. --HappyCamper 20:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that's it. Thanks again HC. hydnjo talk 20:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wireless router in a three storied house with lots of steel beams in the ceilings

What's the best location to put the router, and what kind of router will be suitable? I've heard that because of the steel beams, a more powerful router will be required to make the signal reach everywhere. Any other tips about what to do for better internet speed and quality in this situation? deeptrivia (talk) 04:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

You are going to have some interference, and maybe some shadow areas. I would go with something like the D-Link B+G (?) which has both the 2 & 5 GHz, along with the cards that can pick this up. That way you are using 2 frequencies. I have great success with mine, and I put it at the top of 3 stories. Remember to use MAC security, since you will be broadcasting to the world! --Zeizmic 13:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
You're wrong about the frequencies. 802.11b and 802.11g both run on 2.4 ghz, only 802.11a uses the 5.8 ghz band. Night Gyr 20:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WAP, GPRS & html for mobile

What does it mean when we say that a phone is html enabled? What does it mean when we say that a phone is WAP enabled? What does it mean when we say that a phone is GPRS enabled?

See Microbrowser, Wireless Markup Language, and General Packet Radio Service. -- Rick Block (talk) 05:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How much does AOL's basic service cost? (after promotional months expire)

In the United States, basic service is $23.90 per month plus local sales tax. This includes unlimited time online, both via dialup and broadband connections. --Aaron 06:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I would note that you do not have to pay AOL to use broadband. In no case to they provide the connection. AOL's dialup itself is drastically overpriced. Netzero is an example of many acceptable dialup ISPs costing less than 10 before taxes. Superm401 | Talk 21:30, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
And in the United Kingdom unlimited dialup costs £15.99 per month including VAT, while the cheapest broadband ("Silver" - 512kbps) costs £17.99 per month. Quite a bit more expensive than in the USA, but then, most things are! Loganberry (Talk) 12:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Physics problem

Hey guys, I got stuck on this one problem. If anyone can help me out, that'd be great. Thanks!

A particle moving at 10 m/s reverses its direction to move at 20m/s in the opposite direction. If its acceleration is -10m/s^2, what is the total distance that it travels?

Why are you stuck on this. It requires a readymade formula that's in your textbook. You know v,u,a and you have to find s. deeptrivia (talk) 06:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Not quite. In the ready-made formula s is the distance between the point in space at which the particle starts its motion and the point in space at which it ends its motion. The total distance travelled can be (and, in this case, is) greater than s. Best approach in this case is to break motion down into two parts; first part is slowing down from 10 m/s to stationary, second part is accelerating from stationary to -20 m/s. Gandalf61 13:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh yes, of course! I missed that! Still the same ready-made formula applied twice, though. deeptrivia (talk) 13:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] sun's heat

How scientists measure sun's heat? roscoe_x 09:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

You've come to the right place! Wikipedia has thousands of volunteers ready to do your homework for you. Just type your question into the Magic Answer Box (currently called 'search', but I'm trying to get that changed). Instantly, these people will give you relevant articles that you can copy directly for your assignment. No need to think! --Zeizmic 14:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Try this article. hydnjo talk 20:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The same way they measure the heat and distance of any other stars. By examining the light it emits. - Mgm|(talk) 09:17, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Walking on Mars

Assuming one had an oxygen tank, what kind of suit would be required to safely walk around on Mars? Would one need a full space-suite? Mysteriousinventors 10:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

If reading science fiction has tought me nothing... an insulated suit, it gets fairly cold there. But not a pressurised suit. (Still, reading science fiction has also tought me that venus is rather like Florida, and I don't think that's considered correct any more). Notinasnaid 10:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
It would indeed need to be pressurized, as the atmospheric presure on Mars is much less than on Earth. Besides insulation, it would also need a heating mechanism, unless it was so well insulated that body heat was sufficient to keep it warm. In any case, some system for regulating temp would be needed, as you can't just "unzip it", like a coat, if you get too hot. It would need to be quite puncture resistant, as falling against a sharp rock might create a fatal gash in the suit, otherwise. The weight, although less than on Earth, would be a considerable design constraint, as a heavy suit would significantly limit travel range, due to fatigue. For this reason, an "off the shelf" space suit, designed for EVA, might not work, being designed for weighlessness and too heavy on Mars. For long outings, some source of water would also be important. A communications system would be needed, and some monitoring systems, like for temp and pressure, might also be built in. Rather than engineer any "toilet functions" into the suit, I would expect astronauts to return to the ship for that. The suit would also need some protection from UV and other solar radiation, as Mars lacks the ozone layer which protects us from those things on Earth.
So, to summarize, it would be very much like a standard spacesuit, except a lightweight version designed for a narrower range of outside temps and greater outside pressures. StuRat 11:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, it depends on how much risk you are willing to tolerate. E.g. UV radiation is unlikely to be harmful under brief exposure. (I'm not sure about the need to pressurise. A face mask, like e.g. scuba gear, should be sufficient for breathing purposes, and less likely to tear or puncture.) If you are going on a long expedition, you are more or less certain to bring a rover or something similar along - if only to help bring back samples. The martian day is also fairly close to ours, so there wouldn't be too many huge swings of temperature, so long as you plan correctly.--137.205.236.49 12:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Two different views here on whether the suit needs to be pressurized (discounting mine, which is not based on research). What is the break even point in terms of external pressure, for needing a pressurized suit? I would presume it's the point at which pure oxygen, at the lowest pressure capable of sustaining life, causes bodily injury or an inability to breath due to the lower external pressure? Notinasnaid 12:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
The pressure on the surface of Mars looks to be between 6 and 10 mbar (millibar), depending on the reference consulted, the weather, and the altitude [36]. That's about 1% of the surface pressure on Earth (roughly 1000 mbar at sea level)—so yes, you're going to need a pressurized suit to breath comfortably. For reference, the partial pressure of oxygen in the atmosphere at sea level is about 200 mbar; most healthy adults can tolerate down to about half that, at least for limited periods. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Once again, after all the hard work by science fiction writers, science lets us down. Notinasnaid 11:08, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] color of complex compounds

what is the color of Cu(NH)6

My guess is blue, as many copper based compounds tend to be such. I may be wrong. Elle vécu heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 22:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Or maybe green or blue-green, as quite a lot of copper compounds have those colors, too. StuRat 01:34, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colors of complex compounds

what is the colour of Cu(11)hexaammine --Mufleeh 11:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

It's blue. --HappyCamper 20:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] rotational motion

What is the centrifugal force

An object in motion wants to remain in motion in a straight line, unless another force acts upon it. The force acting upon it to pull it toward to axis of rotation is called the centripetal force. The imaginary countering outward force is called the centrifugal force, but this is really just a reflection of the object wanting to travel in a straight line. StuRat 11:59, 9 January 2006


thankyou

[edit] what is the color of cobolt hexaammine ?

[edit] Cell Structure of a Chicken Egg

I know that the largest cell in the human body is the female ovum (egg), im just curious is a chicken egg also 1 singular cell, cause its so big?

Yes, a chicken egg is a highly complex single reproductive cell (the oocyte) as I remember. Brandmeister 16:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Um, only until it becomes fertilized and divides. It divides many times and a full-sized egg has billions of cells. —Keenan Pepper 18:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
It sounds as if you are saying the white and yolk are made up of many cells? Only the embryo divides so the egg is a single cell. It is different in plants the seed endosperm (similar to the yolk and white) is multicellular. David D. (Talk) 19:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Wow, I never knew that. So, I think it would be most accurate to say, the yolk of an unfertilized egg is a single cell, and the white and shell are just proteins that aren't part of any cell. The cell division after fertilization only happens on a little spot on the yolk (the germinal disk) rather than the whole yolk dividing. Is that correct? —Keenan Pepper 22:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
BTW, our Egg (biology) article looks like it could use a lot of work. —Keenan Pepper 22:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't think the entire yolk divides, rather a chicken egg contains a single cell which divides. It all depends where the DNA is contained. That being said, a frog oocyte is one big cell (about 1mm) and the whole thing divides over and over. Nrets 22:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] radioactivity and living things

I know that radio active materials are bad, and that they give off alpha and beta particles etc. What i dont understand is how this process damages the human body, or any living thing for that matter. What acually happens to cause cancer and other horrible side effects, physiologically and anatomically speaking?

See ionizing radiation and radiobiology. Briefly, what happens is that radiation causes breaks in and damage to DNA. Failure to repair those breaks will kill cells; inaccurate repair leads to mutations and potentially the development of cancer. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, but if you get exposed to a real high dosage of radiation that can kill you in a matter of hours. I've also wondered about this once. Is that also caused by damage to the DNA (causing 'bad' proteins to be made?) or are other molecules also damaged (eg the enzymes themselves for a more direct effect)?
By the way, radioactivity isn't necessarily bad, it's just a matter of dosage. It's all around us and may even take a part in evolution because it occasionally changes some DNA (is this true?). DirkvdM 06:50, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
"radio activity is in the air for you and me" - Kraftwerk 37:38, 21 November 1975 (UTC)

[edit] solid state physics

why do a honey-comb cell is hexagonal in shape?210.212.89.5 14:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Did you read our honeycomb article? Gdr 15:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
This is solid state physics?? —Keenan Pepper 18:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, honey-combs have no moving parts, although bees have quite a few. StuRat 01:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Lol, solid state physics doesn't mean the physics of solid things Solid-state physics--Name------------------name 18:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
No, but one of the meanings of "solid state" is "no moving parts"...so I was having a bit of fun with that def. StuRat 17:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mimosa Tree

Hi, I am trying to find info on the Mimosa tree, please note that the name is used for more than one tree, in Italy the name refers to: [37] and in the U.S. It refers to [38]. I am interested in the Italian version (yellow tree). I am mostly finding info on the red tree

  • What the US name of the tree?
  • What is the official name of the tree?
  • Is there an encyclopedia article on the 'yellow mimosa' tree?
  • What climate does the tree grow in? (Is this tree suitable for SouthEastern U.S.?)
  • (far fetched) I am trying to buy this tree, where do I look and what do I ask for?

~Thank you

Our article on mimosa does not seem to have this information. Rmhermen 18:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
The filename says Acacia dealbata, which is linked from Mimosa... —Keenan Pepper 18:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Originally from Tasmania doesn't tolerate cold temperate climates [39]. Hardiness zones 10-11, ideal for southwest U.S. [40]. Jasongetsdown 19:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Correction: Looks like it may actually need even warmer temps than most of S.E. U.S. [41]. Something tells me that if you can grow it in southern U.K. it has a broader range than 10-11 though. In any case there are numerous sources on the web to buy it. Jasongetsdown 19:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thinking PC

I played Starcraft (mission for protoss, where I should defend a temple). I had invisible dark templars but soon noticed that zerg brings to me the overlords, which are detectors. Then the temple was attacked by mutaliscs, a zerg flying units and the templars couldn't do anything against them. Is this a demonstration of a fact that PC is really thinking? That it has AI etc? 195.150.224.238 16:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

It's a demonstration of StarCraft's AI, but that should not be construed as the PC independently "thinking". It's one of a series of preprogrammed checks, probably akin to:
If I die to invisible units, send detectors.
If opposing units are ground-attack only, send air-to-ground units.
Hope this helps. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 17:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
You could say that the way a game reacts to your choices is a basic kind of AI, but I wouldn't give the game designers too much credit. Games like StarCraft usually operate by following predefined behaviors. One behavior might be, if the human player builds invisible units, build overlords. Some games will "cheat," in other words the computer player will know you have invisible units even if a human player in the same position might not. This does not make them intelligent, just more knowledgeable.
Another way to put it would be: don't confuse logic with intelligence. Jasongetsdown 17:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
A lot of stuff that is called intelligent is just the above but bigger. The term AI is often used for machines with huge databases full of knowledge that the designers have put in. But that is the designer's knowledge, not the machine's. True intelligence would be when a machine gets only a set of general rules that have nothing to do with the outside world and could then apply those rules to info it gets through sensors to build its own image of the world and then use that to interact with it with its actuators (possibly to learn more - that would then be experimenting in stead of plain observing - a next step in intelligence). This set of rules would be its a priori knowledge, what math is to us. (See also miscellaneous question 3 above). DirkvdM 07:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course, if it convinced you, that would count as passing a simple version of the Turing test.--Fangz 20:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, but a simple version of the Turing test would prove nothing at all. The Turing test would have to be very extensive to approach a proof (it still won't be one). You have to keep on trying to trick the machine into making a mistake. Suppose all experts of the world (in all fields, including, say stamp collecting) would come together and put all their knowledge in the machine. The biggest hurdle would then be linguistic - getting it to present that knowledge in a way that sounds convincing. But assume that hurdle is taken. The biggest problem would then be that the machine would know more than a person ever could. But ignoring that, these experts can then keep on feedding the machine with knowledge (as it appears in, say, newspapers) and the machine would then not need to have any capacity to learn and still pass the test. Unless the Turing test provides for that (I don't know if it does, really); isolate the machine, let it read something and then let it interpret it to see if it can integrate it in the knowledge it already has. Sounds like a good test. DirkvdM 10:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DVD Format

Can you please explain what are the Pros, Cons and differences between DVD+RW and DVD-RW

DVD+RW supports "random" write access, which means you can add and remove files without erasing the whole disk and starting over. You can treat a DVD+RW almost like a removable hard disk. DVD-RW is more like CD-RW. If you want to change something, you have to wipe the whole disk clean and start over. The only disadvantage to DVD+RW I can think of is it might be more expensive. —Keenan Pepper 18:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
One more question, then! My computer can do DVD +/- R and RW. Of these, which would I use for fastest data backup? Most reliable? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 20:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Speed should be much the same. I backup to DVD-R, as the media is cheap (cheap media means you can make lots of backups without worrying about the cost) and I've never had a backup be unreadable later. In contrast I have a DVD+RW dvd-recorder (you know, the things that replaced VCRs) and I'have had several (good quality) disks show up with errors, even after one recording and very careful treatment. I don't see a reason to backup to rewritable media of either variety. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I'll write the above statement to the article. roscoe_x 15:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Defnition of epoch, era and eon

What would be the exact defnitions of 'epoch', 'era' and 'eon'; with refrence to the Geological Time Scale?

Reading the Geologic time scale article should give you enough insight to come up with some good definitions. hydnjo talk 20:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] how have modern wars helped with the advancement of medicine and surgery?

Would you like to tell us why you are asking? The reason is that this looks very like a Homework Question. Notinasnaid 18:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
And a very good homework question indeed. And we're very happy to help with homework, or we wouldn't be here. War and surgery have always been closely (and sometimes too facilely) linked, though the topic wasn't closely examined as part of the "history of medicine" until fairly recently. Wwars have both helped and impeded the progress of medicine (e,g, by diversion of resources from the civilian population, by encouraging unethical experimentation, etc.) but you ask about "help" only...

Some random associations:

And so on ans so on and so onl Anyway this may give you some things to think about, others may add more. (improvements, or wars, many of each are missing) - Nunh-huh 08:11, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Gives doctors lots of practice and chances to try new techniques. GangofOne 06:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Chemical warfare suits in Gulf War I
  • Radiation teatment, advances in shelters, treatment for birthdefects; upcoming nuclear wars
War provides us with many solutions for the problems of humanity. GangofOne 16:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] quantum mechanics

is Quantum theory irrational? --Cosmic girl 18:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's definitely counterintuitive, but it has to be to explain the counterintuitive results of actual experiments, at which it's startlingly accurate. I wouldn't say it's "irrational"... —Keenan Pepper 18:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Ditto. Let me give you a sense of the excitement that was expressed by J.H. Van Vleck way back in August 7, 1925 in his "Quantum Principles and Line Spectra" -- ...the quantum theory is so alive that it develops and changes almost overnight.. In this publication, the first 14 pages is dedicated to how the postulates of quantum mechanics fall out naturally from the shortcomings of classical mechanics in describing line spectra. Hm... --HappyCamper 20:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Keenan Pepper. It is highly rational and logical, but counterintuitive and bizarre as well. — Knowledge Seeker দ 20:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

thanx :D...but still, I don't see how something bizarre and counterintuitive can be logical and rational, but I might have missunderstoond u anyway. --Cosmic girl 21:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

May seem irrational now, but you have to realise back then, irrational numbers were the one of the most counter-intuitive things to the ancient Greeks (during the Pythagorean era). Elle vécu heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 22:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Of course something counterintuitive can be rational! Because intuition is not inherently rational. Intuition is experience. When something is in line with our previous experiences then it is intuitive to us. Intuition is a short-cut we take to avoid having to rationalize something, if something seems to "make sense" we accept it and don't bother figuring out why it makes sense. This works quite well most of the time, but once you start considering things which are abstract or very far from our everyday experiences, then intuition becomes increasingly useless. Some simple mathematical examples are the Birthday paradox, the Monty Hall problem and Gabriel's Horn. --BluePlatypus 23:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Continuing along the lines of 'miscellaneous question 3' and 'Thinking pc' above (I've put myself in that mindset, so now I interpret everything in those terms :) ). Quantum theory follows rationality to its logical conclusions. We are born with a priori knowledge, which we use to understand the word around us. All animals and other forms of intelligence have this. We have however formalised those rules (at least we try to). That's called mathematics. Next we started to strictly apply those rules and we came up with all sorts of things that our non-formal minds could no longer follow. You could say we have harnessed our intuition to the point that it's no longer intuitive to us. Then again, the notion of gravity was rather counterintuitive when Newton came up with it (something that excerts a force without touching!?), but we're completely used to it now. So maybe one day everyone will take quantummechanics for granted? Which is not to say we'll fully understand it. After all, do we really understand gravity? We merely accept its existence. DirkvdM 08:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mutating

Is it possible to use radioactive materials to mutate a human or any other creature in a way that will cause noticeable exterior physical changes while being exposed to the radiation in a gradual way as to keep the person or creature from developing cancer?

Yes and no. Radiation is used to create new varieties of orchids and other plants (I think you can just microwave the the seeds, viruses can also cause mutations). The mutations are completely random however. They usually kill the seed or create useless, uninteresting, or grotesque traits. Sometimes however they can result in a new splash of color on the flowers or new variegations.
This is not an appropriate way to create novel new types of animals for a whole host of biological and ethical reasons which I am not qualified to comment on. Suffice it to say that it would not work. Jasongetsdown 19:28, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

From the desk of the guy who asked the question: well, is it possible to do it on single-celled organisms in order to somehow affect the result of the organisms evolution process?

Look up Mutation Breeding[42]
This has been generally confined to plants since there is a massive number of deaths involved. The irony is that almost all food crops have come from this, and that Genetic Engineering was supposed to be a gentler way of improving crops. --Zeizmic 21:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
No. And only no. What happens when you use radiation to cause a mutation? Answer: The radiation hits the DNA molecule, possibly forming a radical, and/or destroying a bond or ionizing it. The radical or ion will then react with whatever happens to be close by. Basically the DNA gets screwed up. Radiation is by its nature random and rather uncontrollable. And the DNA damage it causes is random and uncontrollable. So there is no way at all you can use radiation to cause living mutant cells without causing a lot more dead cells and cancer cells. As Zeizmic says, there's a lot of deaths involved for every surviving mutation. --BluePlatypus 23:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
It may be possible to aim radiation at a particular gene instead of the entire DNA of an organism, thus increasing the chance of affecting that gene only. However, I suspect that more precise forms of genetic engineering will make such an approach seem rather inefficient. StuRat 01:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Nonsense. First: cannot aim radiation that precisely. Aiming it at a tumor is something completely different than aiming it at a MOLECULE. Do you realize how many orders of magnitude size difference there is? And even if you could aim it, it's a moving target. And even if you hit it in the right place, the effect of the radiation is still unpredictable. --BluePlatypus 19:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
You can't aim with radiation, all mutagenesis techniqes are random. If you want to effect a specific gene you can use site-directed mutagenesis or an expession knock-down technique like RNAi.--nixie 01:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Sure you can aim radiation, there are even cancer tratements that aim it at a specific tumor. Are you saying you can't aim it precisely enough to hit a portion of a strand of DNA, instead of the entire length of the strand ? StuRat 01:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes. But since you mention it chemotherapy is not especially specific either, it basically just targets quickly dividing cells, hence the effect on the immune and reproductive systems.--nixie 01:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand your use of the word "either". Radiation therapy IS specifically aimed at the tumor, with, for example, rods of radioactive material contained in lead tubes, which will aim radiation out the end, much like a gun. Many such tubes allow radiation to be concentrated direcly on a tumor. StuRat 03:54, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Even targeting a specific set of cells, a radiation therapy like brachytherapy doens't work by causing a specific type of damage to certain cells - it just destroys any DNA by creating so many errors during DNA replication that the cells can't successfully divide (cancer cells divide frequently so they are affected). It will also damage other cells. --nixie 04:24, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
To summarise the above: you need to hit just the right spot to avoid getting something that has no chance of surviving (or even germinating). So if you use blunt unaimed radiation only one in a million (or what?) will survive (and even then there's little chance that that is something you would want). Right? And if so, what is that 'right spot'?
I'm really intrigued by the idea that most food crops have been altered this way, as Zeizmic says. Considering the dispute, I would like a confirmation of that (or a negation, of course). DirkvdM 08:41, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Most food crops have been altered by selectively choosing naturally occuring mutations, at least some of which are the result of exposure to naturally occuring radiation; it is not true that most food crops have been developed by intentional irradiation by humans. Rmhermen 14:12, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Many contempoary cultivars of all major food crops (like the cereals) have been produced from radiation or EMS mutagenesis. It's a fast way to produce new tratis which can then be bred into plants by backcrossing.--nixie 05:19, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] omniversal travel

Is it possible to construct a device capable of sending someone to any one of the infinite alternate realities or universes? I also have a possible explanation as to the different variations and types of realities and universes: I believe that there are several different "Prime" universes. We live in the Earth Prime universe, or, the universe that all the different alternate realities are based off. All the litirature, stories, history, video game storylines, movies, and TV shows also have a Prime universe that that goes along with each individual series. History willl have several variations, like, George Washington doing a direct attack on the british instead of sneaking up on them during that fateful night. And your favorite characters from games and movies have their own Prime universes with their own infinite number of alternate realities. They all combine into one HUGE and always expanding omniverse. Anyway, you probably get my point. So, could it be possible to make such a device? (p.s. sorry about the long-winded theory. I tend to ramble on sometimes. I also got swept up by the concept and how exciting it would be if my theory proves true.)68.116.175.201 23:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

The existence of alternate realities or parallel universes is only theoretical at this point. I don't believe there is any theoretical framework for the nature of these universes or how they might be associated with ours, so the possibility of travel between them would be completely unknown for now at least. Your best bet is to enjoy some good science fiction on the matter: the Sliders television series, Asimov's The Gods Themselves, and several Star Trek: The Next Generation episodes (as well as from the others series) come to mind; time travel stories also deal with this in a sense. — Knowledge Seeker দ 20:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe? It's hard to guess how a universe you've made up would work. Maybe it would be possible to move from one bit of reality to another, perhaps taking advantage of whatever it is that connects them and brings them into being in the first place, but maybe no travel or transference would be possible. If somebody in this world were made into a character on a TV show, would they be transported there, or would there be a copy living in that world? How would you deal with all the glaring discontinuities in most TV shows? --Black Carrot 20:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

If someone in this world were to be 100% emulated in a TV show, then there would be a copy. As I said earlier about the universes and variations, the TV show would have it's own universe, and have infinite variations. you could have a variation of our universe where YOU (yes, you, Black Carrot) could be of the opposite gender*. As for the discontinuities, there are things in tv shows that are unexplained,and that is where Fanfictions or destiny come in. if there is a unique fanfiction about a book or game, it causes the events of the fanfic to be a real event in that universes Prime. If there are multiple fanfics of the same event in different retellings, they mesh into one rettelling of the event and become true in the Prime of that universe, while variation realities select one of thoes fanfics to be real. if no fanfics are made to explain plotholes, a random explanation happens in the Prime of that universe. The discontinuity could be explained by a fanfic about a change in personality of the character, amnesia, or the characters decision to do something that, ultimately, leads to the lack of continuity. Also, two more things:

  1. 1: Whatever happens in the Prime universe effects the variations that come after it. Changes in a variation only effects the variations that come after it. But in no way do the variations effect their Prime universe, or any others, for that matter. Cross-overs in Fanfics create a variation that is normal except for the cross-over occuring, making it a "Crossed Universe", or a new universe that is one variation of 2 realities.
  2. 2:(*) If this offends anybody, I apologize, and I am not trying to offend anybody in any way.

p.s. I feel like I've found a place where I can share my theories with people without being told to be quiet about "illogical nonsense". :D68.116.175.201 23:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Many people believe that the universe/omniverse/pickyourfavoriteterm is laid out this way, but as a thinking point for your stated view: why is this universe Prime? What distinguishes it from any number of parallel universes, save that you are aware of this one (and consider that "you" are likely singularly aware of a similarly large number of parallel universes within their respective contexts)?

Well, I was trying not to make my posts so long, and thats why I didn't talk about that in my last post. You see, I often think about whether or not were in a fictional world that originated in some book somebody wrote or a lame TV show. For all we know, we could be in the worst sitcom ever made and not know it, But I have proof we're in the Prime Universe. Each variation is caused by the creation of literature that would describe how the world would be if something that happened had occured differently, or never occured at all. If we weren't the prime universe, then there would only be EXTREMELY small changes in between universes. The thing about Variation Universes(VU) is that if the universe is created by a story that tells only about a certain event, then that certain event is the one most important thing in that universes history, while everything else ends up being misinterpreted in general. The Prime Universe was started at random by I-dont-know-what and has no single event being the most important, and all the events that happen in this universe either get lost in the shadow of history or become warped, misread, misinterpreted, and mistranslated over time*. While VU's are created starting with that event, with no history as to what happened before the event took place. (*by this I mean like 200-1500 years)68.116.175.201 23:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Could you sign your work with four tildes(~)? 70.243.46.200 23:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay. :)68.116.175.201 23:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Honestly, the fascinating nature of interdimensional travel notwithstanding, discussion of how fanfic creates new universes is not appropriate here. Bethefawn 02:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

So long as you can avoid sharing your personal opinions in a way that other people will interpret as original research, which is a huge temptation for many of us here, and instead quote other people as factual presentations of what they have to say on the topic, which may be identical to what you believe, you may find value in contributing to articles on Wiki such as Time travel in fiction. User:AlMac|(talk) 07:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is interferon still active after freezing?

Is interferon still active after freezing?

According to Medline, interferon should refrigerated but *not* frozen. However, this is not medical advice -- if you have a medical question regarding medication, it should be directed to a doctor or pharmacist. This response is not a substitute for medical advice. Adrian Lamo 23:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Interferon is a protein hormone. Freezing sometimes changes the tertiary protein structure, and can reduce ability to bind to receptors. The amount of change depends on lots of factors, but is hard to predict without actual experiments on the specific protein in question. It is unlikely to lose all potency with a single episode of freezer temperature or outdoor winter freezing, and does not become "toxic" or harmful, it just has a reduced potency. The degree of degradation (percent of remaining activity) is difficult to predict and might range from as little as 5% reduction of potency to 90%. Sorry, can't be more precise. alteripse 23:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] physics flywheels

I am needing equations and basic information for angle of a flywheel and its varying pulling force which is created by rpms. What weight will the rpms allow the flywheel to pull when its speed increases and decreases? How much should the flywheel weigh? Will the flywheel be at 60, 45, or 30 degrees? This is for an at home project that i hope to take with me to class this fall 2006.

Thank you,

gsm fa smith

Well, I for one don't understand the question, and I think I took this stuff. Use the Magic Answer Box to the left, and try to refine the question. --65.92.79.213 23:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, you could start checking at flywheel, but the question itself makes me think the user is in fact asking about gyroscopes. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 23:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Note that it isn't the weight, but rather the moment of inertia of a flywheel which determines how much energy it has for a given rotational speed. A hoop shape will have a much greater moment of inertia than a disc of the same weight and radius. StuRat 00:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question about the Common cold

Do the antibodies developed during a bout with the Common cold protect one from contracting that particular viral strain again? Specifically, if say within one household, the virus spreads from one to another to another... do the early victims have any immunity to reinfection from the later victims? --hydnjo talk 22:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Sure, as with any systemic infection, either your immune system develops sufficient resistance to it, and you evict it (leaving you with a strong defense against that same strain) or your immune system fails to, and you are overrun and killed by it (that doesn't apply to weird things that hide in out-of-the-way places, like malaria). Infections don't leave of their own accord :) As to reinfection, you're obviously not immune from wholely different strains, but mostly immune to the close relatives of the one you just beat. So if you have two colds in close succession, that's two distinct organisms attacking, not a reinfection by largely the same bug. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Distribution of species

Describe, using examples, how abiotic factors of the environment affect the distribution of species. Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.130.186.214 (talk • contribs).

From the top of this page:
  • Do your own homework - if you need help with a specific part or concept of your homework, feel free to ask, but please do not post entire homework questions and expect us to give you the answers. hydnjo talk 22:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Where it's cold, only penguins live. More species are likely to live where it's warmer. That's why California real estate is so expensive. GangofOne 16:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] where does wax go after it is burned in a candle?

The same place firewood goes when it is burned. See: candle. You'll note that the wax is the fuel, it is actually what is sustaining the fire, not the wick alone. --Quasipalm 23:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Unlike firewood, which is only partially flamable and leaves behind the ash that doesn't burn, wax is 100% flamable and is all burned up to become gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide. StuRat 00:49, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

This was a big issue way back [[43]] Candles dispose of their 'unburnables' in ultra-fine soot. The fragrant candles are especially bad for house soot problems. --Zeizmic 02:17, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

When you burn any type of matter it goes through a process called pyrolysis which is essentially breaking down the matter at a molecular level through oxidation. What is fire? (a rapid oxidation process, which is a chemical reaction resulting in heat and light at varing intensities). So what actually happens when you burn a candle is, the flame of the burning wick melts and vaporizes the wax and you are actually burning the vapors from the wax .The wick simpily acts to increase the surface area to such an extent that even a very low rate of evaporation results in a sufficiently high local concentration of parafin molecules in the air to support combustion.

[edit] January 10

[edit] 4 Nipples: An Isolated Incident, Or An Exciting Trend?

At this very moment, I find myself staring, bemused, at an h2g2 article, which describes the author's nipples, in two lucid sentences, as quadruple in number; symmetrical in arrangement, the lower pair being three inches below the upper pair; slightly uneven in size, the lower pair being smaller than the upper pair; and displaying all the characteristic attributes of the traditional human nipple, including sensation. Whether lactation is, or ever could have been, such a characteristic is not discussed. The remainder of the entry, comprising an additional three sentences, contains a description of the measures so far taken to allievate the author's confusion and despair, and an urgent plea for help which can not be lightly ignored by those possessed of even a modicum of compassion and human feeling. In the name of ben4nips, I call for a poll! An immediate and widespread display of generosity for this poor soul, whose only wish is to know whether he is alone in this world, or if there is another who shares his/her fate. If you or anyone you know, here or elsewhere, now or elsewhen, on Wikipedia or off, is or knows of someone who owns a perfect set of four or more nipples, respond! Hark to this call! A curious public awaits.

One other thing: try to make sure you can substantiate your story if asked to. We don't want any "I have a cousin who has a friend whose sister's dog heard from their pet psychic that someone they saw on the street had four nipples poking from under her shirt."

The article in question: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brunel/A8291702 --Black Carrot 00:40, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if the above is even a question, but we have the article Supernumerary nipple. Now a question of my own, is having a third nipple hereditary? Given the instances in my family I'm guessing it is, but our article doesn't say.--Commander Keane 01:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

An interesting question. I find it hard to imagine it not being hereditary. To clarify the above: I'd like to know how many people with four (or more) normal nipples there are within reach of this page, or in general, neither of which that page gets into. Another question: What's the most nipples anyone's ever had? --Black Carrot 05:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

A third nipple? Given the symmetry of the human body I'd expect an even number. Also, 2% of women have this? Must be very small in most cases then (or haven't I been paying attention?). DirkvdM 08:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't think aberations (if that's what you call them) like extra nipples, birthmarks and (say) extra fingers generally come symetrically. And the external links at Supernumerary nipple indicate that most third nipples are not very noticable, some just being a bit of hair, or a small pimple-like formation. When I was younger I thought mine was a chicken pox scar.--Commander Keane 10:43, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm interested to see who here as a 3rd nipple. Do you? --Ali K 14:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
For myself, I'd say that extra 'nipples' resembling birthmarks, warts or pimples are of only limited coolness. Like having a sixth finger that's a quarter of an inch long. Now, a second pinky on each hand, that's something. How would the muculature work for that? Imagine that person's forearms. Anyway, I've heard that third 'nipples' are relatively common(meaning you might actually come across a few occasionally), but no word yet on how common people with natural-looking and fully functioning extra pairs of nipples are. --Black Carrot 22:40, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Are the extra nipples fully functional? Sounds very sexy. User:AlMac|(talk) 22:43, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Male nipples don't have much function anyway. As for girls, apparently they generally aren't functional, but sometimes a breast develops behind them. Black Carrot 22:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I knew a girl that had 6. She only showed us the extra 4, and the top 2 were almost regular but with no areola, and the bottom 2 were pretty small with one of them being almost not noticeable, more like a birthmark. I don't recall if she said they were sensitive or not. The article describes that they can be nearly fully developed, so I would assume that would include innervation. - Taxman Talk 16:23, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

That's one. Out of curiosity:
  • Did they "appear along the two vertical "milk lines" which start in the armpit on each side, run down through the typical nipples and end at the groin"?
  • How far down was each pair?
  • How old was she? If prepubescent, and you've seen her since then, was there any additional development? --Black Carrot 22:11, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
  • She was 20, fairly attractive because I know that was an implied question, and yes they lined up vertically. Each row was about 2-3 inches below the next, I can't remember exactly it was 10 yrs ago. Never saw her again, it was a friend of a friend type thing. It's basically a vestigial mammalian thing, so think how they line up on any other mammal that has them. - Taxman Talk 00:29, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Anybody else? Black Carrot 01:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
At all? Black Carrot 20:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eating faster

Does eating faster make you fatter???

This is a nice link [44] Get the movie Supersize Me, and slow down. --Zeizmic 02:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Possibly. Here are a couple of ways this could happen:
  • If you have a short time to eat, say before you need to leave for work, then eating faster may allow you to take in more calories in the short time period.
  • Eating has a certain amount of tradition and habit to it, so if your brain doesn't feel like you have done the proper eating ritual, it may tell you to go back and do it again. This is one reason why popping pills for all your nutitional needs might not work, either. StuRat 02:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

A physiological reason is that incoming food stimulates release of incretins and other hormone signals that begin to signal satiety to the hypothalamus. If you eat fast, you put more food in before your brain decides you aren't so hungry anymore. alteripse 03:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

If you watched the UK Sky One Paul McKenna programme yesterday (which you may possibly have done to prompt this question) you'll notice he also discusses this. I've tried it, and eating slower does make you feel more full. Alteripse's explanation is perfect - you could describe there being a lag between you eating, and your stomach telling your brain you're feeling full. Eating more slowly allows time for you to feel full while still eating thus eating less instead of over-eating and then feeling bloated. You can find clips from the "Paul McKenna will make you thin" show at http://www.skyone.co.uk/mckenna -Benbread 20:36, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

No. Check out top competitive eaters, they are not fat at all. Grue 11:46, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] history of the internet

Maybe try History of the Internet? --AySz88^-^ 03:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Body Heat

How much heat can a body really give off? Why does the room temperature raise when i enter?

According to [45] the average human gives off a minimum of 240 BTU/hour (70 Watts) of heat. So yeah, that's why room temperature rises when you enter (though I'd be surprised if you can sense it except over long periods of time in a small, insulated room). -User:Lommer | talk 07:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to reply to myself, but this source estimates that the body can produce up to 2000 BTU/hr for periods of exertion. They also quote 400 BTU/hr as the minimum. -User:Lommer | talk 07:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Looked up btu. Truns out it's almost equal to 1 kJ.
As for some examples. I was once in a New Zealand tramping hut without a stove, wet and freezing my balls off. After awhile a group of over ten people entered and within 10 minutes I was warm. I was really impressed by the effect. And a Dutch architect has desigend an office building that does not require heating because it makes use of the heat generated by the people and computers inside. I don't know how much each contributed, though. And the same for the Glass Palace, which was a department store with a very advanced (for the time, but still, I believe) climate control that used the warmth of the customers to heat the building. DirkvdM 09:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I once read that a current office building in Kiruna neeeds cooling 90% of the year (!), so that dutch architect probably didn't really do something really rememberable. There are also regular houses built outside of Gothenburg that are heated only by the humans and electrical equipment (no heaters). As office buildings have a lot more computers and other stuff in them than normal houses, I wouldn't think it was that difficult for him... TERdON 02:07, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Way up in Kiruna, no less! You Scnadinavians really are among the most progressive people I've heard of (both politically and in engineering). If it's that easy, then why do most offices still use heating? Have they been designed so badly? But the first oil crisis was 30 years ago and offices probably have a considerable turnover (or what is tha called? I mean they get torn down and rebuilt). So one would think many would now no longer need heating (most of the year at least). DirkvdM 11:02, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Firing Distance

Lets say you shoot a standard Revolver with a standard bullet into the air at 45 Degrees, how high would it go, and how far would it go? Have there been any documented cases of people getting killed by bullets that just fell from the sky?

  • I can't help you out with the fired bullet, seeing as it factors in many variables, like friction from the air. But I can suggest you see Category:Firearm deaths and work with the links given there. --JB Adder | Talk 05:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't know anything about a bullet's initial velocity or drag coefficient (both of which I would think would depend on which 'standard' bullet you used), but I've heard that it's impossible for a bullet/coin/etc to fall fast enough to penetrate a person's skull. see terminal velocity --Black Carrot 05:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Note, however, that a bullet could still kill by penetrating an eye, the heart, the neck, or soft spots on the skull, like at the template (and growth seams in children). StuRat 03:22, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I can't find it right now but snopes debunked that a bullet coming down after being fired straight up would kill someone (i.e. it won't). Apparently a bullet's terminal velocity is lower than its muzzle velocity by quite a bit. As for the first part of the question, what is a "standard revolver"? There are so many kinds, you would really have to specify the type and ammunition to get a decent answer. Even then, I'd guess an experiment would be the easiest way to predict it with any accuracy. -User:Lommer | talk 07:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Suppose the bullet lands anywhere (anywhere) on Earth. About 2/3 is water. And on land only a few percent (?) is built up. And even if it falls in a city. Suppose 1 million people on 100 km2 (roughly Amsterdam). Seen from above, one person takes up maybe 0.1 m2. Times 1 million is 0.1 km2. That's 1/1000 of the surface. Add to that that (depending on the culture and the time of year) maybe a few percent of people will be outside, and many of those in cars. So even if you fire a gun straight in the air there will be a chance of one in a hundred thousand that someone would be hit. Supposing that this has been done in Amsterdam maybe a few hundred times since the invention of guns (haven't a clue really) and chances are it never happened here. But somewhere on Earth? Most probably.
For example. A great great grandfather of mine once went hunting with bow and arrow (hey ho). He shot at a bird, missed, and waited for the arrow to return. Which he didn't see coming. Guess why.... And now for the romantic conclusion. He was engaged and said to his fiancee that the couldn't make her keep her promise now that he was so deformed (one eye out). But she said she loved him for who he was inside (or something similarly tacky) and still wanted to marry him. Now isn't that sweet? (Also, if she hadn't I wouldn't have been here.) DirkvdM 09:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Firing distance depends mostly on muzzle velocity. Larger rounds can have a much higher muzzle velocity. Smaller rounds cannot. So, wind resistance plays a minor role. The larger the round, the more wind resistance, the higher muzzle velocity you will use to overcome it. I never studied handguns. I studied rifles. The asbolute maximum distance a round may travel is rarely noted. Instead, the maximum distance that a target may be hit is used. For example, the M16 is highly effective at 500m, with a maximum effective range of 1,200m. Assuming that it can travel at least twice the maximum effective range, you are looking at well over 2,000m for a maximum distance. --Kainaw(talk) 14:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I entirely doubt that anyone debunked this, because there are verified reports of people being killed in this way by 'celebratory fire'. [46]--Fangz 19:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I got around to looking this up on Cecil Adams's website, and here's what he has to say about death by falling bullet: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a950414b.html --Black Carrot 22:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Router transmission rate help

I need some help with setting the wireless transmission rate on my Siemens SpeedStream 6520 router. It is set to AUTO by default, but I need to change it to 2 Mbps to get it to work with my Nintendo DS in online play. I've found the option, but changing it seems to have no effect; the setting stays on AUTO. Changing all other settings seems to have a permanent effect though. If you want, you can watch this video of my attempt at changing the settings (you'll need the Microsoft MPEG codec, which comes with Windows XP). If anyone else has this same router, help would be greatly appreciated. -- Daverocks 05:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't have that router, but on my D-link you need to reboot the router for some settings to take effect. I watched your video, after clicking "Finished" click on "Reboot" (you will loose you internet connection while it reboots), and let us know if that works.--Commander Keane 07:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Rebooting does help to bring other settings into effect, but seemingly not the data transfer rate. I've tried it a few times, both by resetting the switch physically and clicking "Reboot" on the interface. Thanks for replying though. -- Daverocks 09:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Can you get it to use any wireless transmission rate other than 2 Mbps? Also, I'm surprised that the DS needs the router settings to be changed (I thought they had some crafty people at Nintendo). Have you tried the DS while just using the Auto setting?--Commander Keane 10:20, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Nope, can't change it to anything else other than auto. And if my DS worked properly at the AUTO setting, I would never have touched my router settings. However, it commonly freezes at the start of a race (it's Mario Kart DS), and I get an error code 94030. I found a huge thread here with people having the same problem, and they mostly report that changing their transmission rate solves their problem. -- Daverocks 06:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to insult you about the whole "crafty people at Nintendo", I should have googled to see that this was a common problem with the DS. A google search of the Siemens SpeedStream 6520 indicates that the firmware is crap. Are you running the most up-to-date firmware? --Commander Keane 07:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you on the quality of the firmware. I'm probably not running the most up-to-date firmware, but I wouldn't know where to find newer. A google search doesn't help me much. Maybe you could help me find a link to updated firmware? :) -- Daverocks 07:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Wait, I don't want to have sounded stupid in what I just said. Is it actually possible to download updated firmware from the Internet and install it on the router? (I apologise if this question sounds stupid.) -- Daverocks 07:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I never consider any question to be be stupid and you are right, you can simply download firmware from the internet. Your router will actually download it for you. I'll paraphrase the instructions found in the instruction manual

  • Click the Update Firmware button from your "Gateway Health" window
  • Select Remote to get the router to check for the software online

WARNING: Do not interrupt the Gateway during the firmware upgrade session (it's not kidding, if you unplug half way through the upgrade the router will need to be returned to the factory, the reset button won't work either). Let me know how you get on. --Commander Keane 18:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't seem to have the "Update Firmware" button under "Gateway Health", even while logged in as admin. If you look at this image I made of my interface versus the manual's interface, it is clear that I don't have the option. Maybe I need to update my firmware so I can get the "Update Firmware" button ;) -- Daverocks 10:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I give up. Give Siemens tech support a phone call (or maybe Bigpond), because this is one hell of a Bowser sized problem.--Commander Keane 14:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Heh, maybe I will. Thanks a bunch for your help, anyway. -- Daverocks 01:33, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Periods during pregnancy

Is it possible for a woman to have periods during pregnancy, and if so, will the cycle (during pregnancy) differ from the normal menstrual cycle (that is, when the woman is not pregnant)? I ask because I've checked the Menstrual cycle and Pregnancy articles, and neither say anything about it. I thank you greatly if you can answer this. --JB Adder | Talk 05:12, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

  • If I recall correctly, menstruation is basically the periodic shredding of the endometrium. An embryo attaches itself to the endometrium, so a regular period would literally throw out the baby with the bathwater, so no. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 05:23, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I wouldn't think so. A period involves flushing out that month's egg and everything that would have supported it through pregnancy so they can be remade for the next month. If somehow something resembling a period did occur, I would think it would remove the embryo/fetus/child as well. And the way I'm used to hearing, the monthly period stopping is one of the traditional signs of pregnancy. --Black Carrot 05:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
  • While a pregnant woman doesn't menstruate, bleeding duing the first trimester is relatively common, and could be a sign of a complications like an ectopic pregnancy or a miscarrige.--nixie 05:47, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pomegranate

How do you properly describe the distribution of seeds inside a pomegranate? --HappyCamper 05:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Each seed resides within an aril. I've always thought of the arils as "clusters" separated by a white membrane. hydnjo talk 15:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Time and relative demensions in space(TARDIS)?

How would I make one of these?--205.188.117.71 06:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Go to God school ?
If you literally want to make the actual TARDIS, then you are pushing your luck; TARDISes uses highly advanced sciences, which we humans cannot even begin to understand. If, on the other hand, you just want to find out what comprises of a TARDIS, then go to the TARDIS article.
If, on the other hand, you just want to make a model TARDIS, then look for the Doctor Who Technical Guide in your local bookshop or second-hand store, or you can ask me to send you the scans of the actual pages which contain how to make a model TARDIS. --JB Adder | Talk 07:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Does the bookshop have to be local? What if that doesn't have it, is he allowed to go to anbother one? :) DirkvdM 09:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
He can go to any bookshop in any time or space, but first he'd have to make a TARDIS. DJ Clayworth 18:17, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Become a Time Lord. --Canley 13:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

The Brigadier: "Damn it, can't we just once, just one damn time, be invaded by hostile aliens who aren't immune to bullets ?" StuRat 07:25, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flight at low altitude

Is flight at low altitudes possible? If so why aeroplanes fly at such high altitudes? If not why is it not possible?

Of course it's possible. However, if I remember correctly, it's not efficient to fly at low altitudes. Dysprosia 08:08, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
  • It also helps commercial airplanes avoid high buildings, paragliders, and all sorts of other things you have at lower altitudes. - Mgm|(talk) 09:30, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
At high altitudes planes may catch a jetstream that goes their way. At very low altitude, however, a plane could use the aircushion that form between it and the ground for lift (saving energy again). This would of course be a very low altitude, like 2 m or something. Alas I forgot what this is called. And the surface would have to be very smooth, like water. In that case, it could even dip its wings in the water and become a hydrofoil. In which case it would no longer be called an airplane, though. DirkvdM 09:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
That is called ground effect and it occurs when an aircraft is within 1/2 its wingspan from the ground. Not a good thing to be doing a 500 mph. Turbine engines are much more efficient at high altitude which is why they fly as high as they do, also at normal cruise altitudes planes are able to avoid most bad weather.--◀Pucktalk▶ 09:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
To illustrate the effect of a jetstream as a way for airlines to save time and fuel an example. Flying across Australia from Sydney to Perth takes 4h 45m while the return trip is 40 minutes (14%) shorter, at 4h 05m. (Source: [47] & [48])--Commander Keane 10:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
If you want to see proof, enjoy:
http://www.wimp.com/under/
http://www.wimp.com/altitudefour/
http://www.wimp.com/altitudethree/ --Black Carrot 22:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
  • There are at least five reasons why airliners fly at high altitudes, of which three are noted above.
    • It is more efficient: this is because there is less air at high altitudes and therefore less fuel must be burned to overcome air resistance.
    • It is impossible to crash into a mountain, even if you make a navigational error, if you are flying higher than any mountains on your route.
    • On certain routes the plane may be able to take advantage of a jet stream.
    • In addition, the flight will generally be above the weather, since most weather systems are confined to the troposphere. While turbulence is still possible in the stratosphere and thunderstorms or hurricanes may extend that high, in general one expects a smooth ride.
    • Finally, high-altitude flight is significantly safer if something goes wrong, because it takes time for the plane to descend. For example, if an airliner runs out of fuel at cruising altitude, it can still reach an airport 50 miles away or even farther; this gliding ability is why this incident ended happily. Or in other situations, such as these two, the pilot has time to identify how the crisis impairs the functioning of the plane and to deal with it at least partially. Of course disasters can happen at high altitude as well, and the need for cabin pressurization introduces its own risks (as in the last incident I mentioned), but they are not as great as the risks of flying near the ground. Most accidents that do happen happen at one or the other end of the flight, when the altitude is lowest, and a big reason is the absence of time to react to problems.
--Anonymous, 23:20 UTC, January 10, 2006
Also, there is a need for "stacking". Since many airplanes must cross each other's paths (as viewed from the top) it is necessary to have them at different heights so they don't usually crash into each other until they are paid off. Typically they are spaced out 1000 ft apart. So, just 5 such stackings result in a spread of almost a mile. "Puddle jumpers" (short-run flights) are usually at the lower altitudes with long-range flights at the top. Planes circle up to and down from altitude near their departure and arrival airports. StuRat 03:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


As an example of a airliner flight conducted at low altitude, with disasterous consequences, see Air New Zealand Flight 901. --Robert Merkel 00:32, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Technically, hovercrafts can be viewed as flying too. At a few decimeters' altitude. TERdON 02:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Ok let me restate my question. I wanted to ask why weren't we able to build a flying machine that would fly at low altitudes like birds??
Sign with four tildes(~), please. A few reasons. Many are listed above. Another is that, to hold people, a plane must be at least a certain size, which makes it significantly less maneuverable than a bird, which is dangerous down where there are trees, telephone lines, people, and lots of other birds. If you don't require that it hold people, there are plenty of planes (everything from folded paper to full-on RC http://www.wimp.com/remoteairplane/) that are the size of birds and that fly at much the same altitude. Black Carrot 04:58, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, fighter jets occasionally fly at very low altitude - to avoid radar, for instance. They are manoeuvrable and small enough to be able to avoid obstacles more easily than a full-sized passenger airliner, but low-level flying is still extremely hazardous, because human reactions just aren't always fast enough to avoid obstacles at several hundred kilometers an hour. Also, if you're flying over populated areas, the noise will be an issue, as airplanes are (still) very noisy beasts. So, to answer your questions: we can build planes to fly at low altitude, but it's rarely practical / useful to do so.
And since you talk of "flying machines", I'm amazed no-one has mentioned helicopters - they often fly at altitudes comparable to birds. Since they can hover (and fly more slowly than airplanes), they are easier to fly close to the ground. — QuantumEleven | (talk) 09:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bio Medical Engineering

I'm doing Electronics engg. Is it possible for me to continue my higher studies in bio-medical engg? How many years of study is it? Wat are the universities in the U.S.A. and U.K. which offer this course? Wat are the job opportunities for this course?

Re-edited by JB Adder to remove preformatting. --JB Adder | Talk 09:00, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
You're asking the wrong people here. Ask your course co-ordinator/college professor about this, because we are in no place to answer such a question. --JB Adder | Talk 09:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
There are certainly opportunities to continue your studies into biomedical engineering - I'm biased, because it's what my degree is in, but there's plenty of job opportunities. You For a list of which universities offer biomedical engineering in the UK, try www.ucas.com. Proto t c 11:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

My Dad had a job at the "entry level" in this field (before he retired), he did maintenance and repair on medical equipment at a hospital. This only required an Associates Degree (2 yrs) from a community college. Designing said equipment would be the high end in this field. StuRat 03:04, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] powder flow properties range

pharmaceutics : tell me a powder flow properties range

[edit] AC source frequency

Household appliances like fans operate at frequences around 60HZ...wheras aeroplanes work at 6000HZ...give reasons

Hey Sturat, make us up a good 'Homework' template. --Zeizmic 13:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but "I's don't knows nuttin' 'bout birthin' no templates". I also rather enjoy the personalized abuse we aim at those asking stock homework questions. StuRat 03:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Regardless, check our article on transformers. The answer is there, but this case is noted precisely at the high frequency operation section. But please, read the whole thing to properly understand the reasons. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 14:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
No they don't, they operate at 50Hz! :) DirkvdM 09:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Film deaths?

When you see someone die in a film usually through being shot or stabbed through the torso they begin to bleed through the mouth or nose, is this realistic? and why does it happen? (7121989 13:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC))

Puncture the lung and it will fill with blood. When you breath out, blood comes out. --Kainaw (talk) 14:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

It happens more often in films than in real life. Think of it as the cinematographic equivalent of replacing the eyes with X's in a cartoon. alteripse 17:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Or crashing cars exploding. Hardly ever happens in real life. DirkvdM 09:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Heh. On The Simpsons, everything that crashes explodes. Including The Flying Nun. User:Zoe|(talk) 00:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hydrogen Production

My father-in-law has an idea to produce hydrogen by putting high voltage into a tank of water and bottling up the hydrogen as it comes out of the water. I've tried to argue that it will not work, but he doesn't believe me. Anyone have simple arguments against this? I'd like to get him to stop before he electrocutes himself. --Kainaw (talk) 14:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

this is possible check electrolysis, the electricity splits water into its ions as they then lose or gain electrons in redox or oxidisation reactions. (7121989 14:20, 10 January 2006 (UTC))
High voltage produces sparks. Hydrogen is very flammable. If it works, he'll blow his tank up, and possibly himself (show him a picture of the Hindenburg). And if it doesn't work, then he won't have any hydrogen. So it's either potentially fatal, or pointless. Point him in the direction of hydrogen cells, which use electrolysis in a safer manner. Proto t c 14:24, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
If you want to experiment with hydrogen, then do this experiment in a small bottle and use a 9V battery so you dont have the risk of a explosion or a elecro-shock. helohe (talk) 15:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Basicaly something like this will work:

If the above doesn't scare him, then know that it is possible to walk into a hydrogen burn without seeing it. [49] This happens at refineries all the time. --Zeizmic 15:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, electrolysis like this is perfectly possible and practical; people do it all the time. (It's a standard demo in high-school chemistry classes, for example.) You don't actually need high voltages, either. (The amount of hydrogen you get is proportional to the current, so you're better off with lower voltages and higher currents.) But, you won't solve the energy crisis this way, because the energy you get by burning the hydrogen you generate won't be any greater than the energy you spent splitting it off in the first place. Steve Summit (talk) 18:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

We need to discover that enzyme that apparently generates hydrogen and oxygen from water in photosynthesis. I asked my biology teacher what it was, and I'm surprised we haven't discovered it yet. Then we would just need it to work in-vitro, which we can just provide heat to drive the energy for. Elle vécu heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 22:38, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Remember there is a difference between protons and hydrogen gas. However, in some photosynthetic organisms (algae) there is a hydrogenase enzyme that will give the proton an electron to release hydrogen gas. This will only work under atypical conditions but it is possible to build a bioreactor. See the following reference for more details Melis, A.; Zhang, L.; Forestier, M.; Ghirardi, M.; and Seibert, M.; Sustained photobiological hydrogen gas production upon reversible inactivation of oxygen evolution in the green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii; Plant Physiology 122; pages 127-135. A bacteria Pyrococcus furiosus also has hydrogenases. i'm sure there are many more examples in bacteria and algae. David D. (Talk) 22:54, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Don't know what source he was thinking of (or purpose, for that matter), but I suppose you need DC for this, not AC....
I tried this as a kid; I split a double wire at both ends, exposed the cores, made the wires at one end of unequal length, put that end in a test tube and stuck the wires at the other end in a wall outlet. At that moment I saw a big blue 'flash' (don't know how to describe it, but it was all-encompassing, not a streak of lightning or something) which blinded me for a few seconds. At the same time I heard shouts from all over the house. I had blown a central fuse or something. I've done some weird stuff in my youth (and the rest of my life for that matter) but this gave me the biggest fright of all. I've had a healthy respect for electricity since. DirkvdM 09:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Which drug comes closest to being a healthy replacement for sleep?

Which drug is the safest or most acceptable "replacement" for sleep in the long term?

If you go over to the Magic Answer Box on the left and type in 'sleep', you get a really good article (I just read it!). There is no substitute for sleep. If you're a fighter pilot and your life depends on staying awake a bit longer, then there are fancy stimulants, but you will pay for it. --Zeizmic 18:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Please do read the Sleep article and you will gain some insight and understanding. hydnjo talk 20:23, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, modafinil is a "mild" stimulant which seems to exact a fairly light price for the wakefulness it gives in return. Military test subjects have used it to stay fully awake (e.g., no loss of coordination or cognitive abiities) for 72 hours, then sleeping for 8, over several months at a time with no apparent ill effects. It will, however, give your urine the sulphurous odor of rotten eggs. —James S. 07:20, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Death of course, is an eternal form of sleep. [/cynicism]. Elle vécu heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 00:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey guys, (s)he's asking about sleeping drugs, not stimulants!.
There can be several health risks. Firstly of course the risks of drug use in general, such as potentially lethal doses, dependence (having more trouble to get to sleep without it) and tolerance (needing ever higher dosages). Barbiturates are among the oldest 'modern western' sleeping drugs and among the nastiest drugs in general when it comes to kicking the habit. Worse than heroin I've heard. People have committted suicide during abstinence.
But I suppose you mean 'healthy sleep'. Since little is known about sleep little can be said about that. I was a very bad sleeper as a kid until I discovered marijuana. Just a small dose works miracles. However, as many have observed, it deprives you of your dreams, which doesn't sound too healthy (or, alternatively, you can't remember them in the morning). But I've used it for about 25 years (on a daily basis, except when travelling) and I'm still pretty sane (ehm....). Something that is often conveniently forgotten by anti-drug fanatics is that the dosage is all-important. Same with legal medical drugs and poisons (it's not the stuff that's poisonous but the amount or the concentration). Except marijuana is rather unique in that it has no lethal dosage and i ngeneral it's one of the safest drugs around. I'd say, try to find a drug-free way to get to sleep (meditation didn't work for me, but maybe it will for you) and if you must use a drug (and it's legally safe enough where yo live) try marijuana.
Having said that, I'm getting off marijuana, alcohol, tobacco and coffee at the same time right now (gradually lowering the dosages). Tobacco is the toughest one to kick, but I'm almost down to zero use now. DirkvdM 10:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Who discovered DNA?

HI I'm doing a project on DNA at secondary school level (year 10) but first of all need to un derstand the basics, in terms of discovery, in a simple way. Who actually discovered DNA in terms of the helix model, because I always get a variety of names. Was it Rosalind Franklin, or James Watson and Francis Crick? I would be at this stage very grateful of any information received! Thanks.

Yeah! Once again I tried the Magic Answer Box and typed in DNA. You should try it, it's really fun! --Zeizmic 18:08, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Do please read the DNA article as it will help with your understanding of the different helix geometries. A year 10 student should be able to understand most of the article. Come back if there is something in the article that you don't understand. hydnjo talk 20:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "High grade" versus "low grade" energy?

A question for the thermodynamicists out there. I get the impression that it is probably useful to classify various energy sources as being "high grade" versus "low grade" or something in between, depending on how generally useful they are. For example, an energy source that manifests itself as heat with a temperature just a few degrees above ambient is "low grade"; you can use it to warm yourself up, but not much else. On the other hand, electricity is extremely "high grade"; you can do almost anything with it. (Mechanical energy, such as produced by a motor, is somewhere in between.)

Mixed up with my notion of "high grade" is an element of controllability; we seem to place a (to my mind) ridiculously high premium on the easy controllability of energy. For example, in a diesel-electric locomotive, diesel fuel is burned in a diesel engine to produce rotary motion... which turns a generator which generates electricity which is used to run motors to develop rotary motion again. This twice-around-the-barn conversion pathway comes at a pretty steep cost in efficiency, as opposed to having the diesel engines turn the wheels directly, but the compensating advantage is that the electric motors can be very finely and gradually controlled, whereas a pure-diesel locomotive would require some kind of high-power transmission, and those are notoriously difficult to build.

The tradeoffs can also be seen in home heating. If you heat your house with electricity, it's seemingly 100% efficient: any electricity which isn't converted by your electric heater into heat to heat your house with is lost as waste heat which... also heats your house. But of course it's not 100% efficient if you go back and look at the fuel that was (typically) burned in order to generate the electricity in the first place. If you had used the same amount of fuel to heat your house with directly (i.e. by burning it in your own furnace) it would certainly be much cheaper (and probably also more efficient). Heating your house with "high-grade" electric energy is overkill; heating is one of the few things you can usually get away with using the lowest grades of energy for.

Anyway, all of this is by way of prelude to my question, which is: what terms do real thermodynamicists use to talk about these notions which I've informally and unscientifically labeled "low grade", "high grade", and "controllable"?

Steve Summit (talk) 18:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I believe the concept of high grade and low grade can be defined by exergy, which is the maximum amount of work that can be obtained from a system before it reaches equilibrium. Akamad 19:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Which basically is that low-grade energy has a high amount of entropy, and high-grade energy has a low amount of entropy, right? I one time brought the topic to my physical science teacher of why we couldn't just use concentrate the exhaust of the air conditioner to a heating point and use the thermoelectric effect to generate current to help alleviate the apparently expensive energy costs of using energy to ... remove heat energy from the air. He responded by saying that the thermoelectric effect creates "low-grade energy" and suggested using a steam turbine instead, which puzzled me at first, because it looks more inefficient. Elle vécu heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 22:34, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
See also Gibbs free energy deeptrivia (talk) 05:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I like the term Energy density (a rather undeveloped article). High-grade energy is the same as high-density energy. Low-grade or low-density energy requires a large amount of space, such as wind power, or trying to extract waste heat. --192.75.48.150 12:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Matlab for fringe counting

Can anyone give some idea as to how to count the number of fringes in a photoelastic material on being loaded. The fringe pattern consists of several fringes, of usually distorted elliptical shape, but other patterns may also be seen. So how can I make an algorithm so that even if distortions are present, the counting will be accurate? Note that algorithm should be for matlab only. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NIKHIL SHARMA (talk • contribs).

Have you searched (in a journal database, Compendex is good if you have access to it) for: photoelasticity AND fringe AND algorithm?
Do you have any image processing algorithms yet (eg have you run an edge detection algorithm) or are you starting from scratch?
I'm curiuous, what is this for? Are you a materials science uni student?--Commander Keane 23:30, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Well commander keane, thanks for answering, but I dont have any access to your mentioned journals. We, i.e. me and my friends are working on a project for : STRESS ANALYSIS USING DIGITAL IMAGE PROCESSING in which we want to use algorithms for fringe counting, which then would be used for further analysis. I and my friends are mechanical engineering students from India. Yes we have used and are familiar with the in-built edge detection methods like LoG, canny, prewitt et al. But still we want some theoritical base as how to count them , the logic behind them, and also how to make up for anomalies in the fringe pattern. And yes, we are starting from scratch. So could anyone mention journals or websites catering to above needs. And note that the explanation should be in regards to matlab and if possible the journals should be free. (well, asking for too much?) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NIKHIL SHARMA (talk • contribs).
NIKHIL SHARMA, please post any additions right here, you don't need to start a new question for every reply. I'm disappointed that you don't have access to Compendex (or maybe Science Direct, that's a good one too) from your library computer system. However, I've had a look at some journals articles but none of them mention the edge counting algorithm. I'll keep on looking but don't keep hopes up. In the mean time, have you considered asking a lecturer in the computer science departement of your university who specialises in computer imaging (or maybe a PhD student)?--Commander Keane 04:38, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Remote Noise Interferance

I hooked my Wireless Transmitter into my Digital Cable and then I hooked my Wireless Reciever into my DVD Recorder. Now when i press a button on any remote, i hear noise interferance on the TV. Is there anyway to prevent this?

The obvious way to prevent this interference is to not use wireless transmitters and receivers. Most remote controls are infrared, and I don't see how that could produce noise interference, unless your remotes work on a wireless radio system. -- Daverocks 05:52, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Semantic but valid question on article about Gaia Hypothesis

I realize that I have no scientific standing to ask a question about the article on the Gaia hypothesis, although I took graduate courses in geology in the early 80's, and in early 1979 took one of the good, early courses on "Ecoscience." I simply do not understand the language usage in one very specific case at the end of the article. It seems to me that the discpline of ecoscience of around 1980 had already developed a better and also accepted usage for one specific case which I describe below, in terms of a specific, just barely possible modification of one phrase at the bottom of the article on Gaia:

At the bottom of the article, there is an abbreviated section titled: "Gaia hypothesis in ecology." Here it is stated that "most ecologists agree to assimilate the biosphere to a super ecosystem...." Could this simply be a minor carelessness at the end of a very wonderful article? Let me voice my doubt by asking a question about the use of the phrase "super ecosystem." In what way does the expression "super ecosystem" differ in its meaning from the old "ecosphere" of around 1980? The "super ecosystem" as used describes the Earth at a planetary scale, such as is involved in the simpler description of "ecosphere."

Thank you for looking into this. --Eorth57 21:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I fixed your formatting. Hope you don't mind. —Keenan Pepper 21:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't have an answer to your question, but you might also want to post it to the article's talk page. Each article in Wikipedia has a talk page, and people interested in that particular article (including, very likely, some of the people who helped write it) are likely to see your question there. Chuck 22:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
You are correct, the sentence is gibberish. I will leave a note on the talk page asking for clarification so we can make it clearer. alteripse 11:27, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recommend me a book or two on writing programming language interpreters...

So I'm a recent college graduate, I should be getting my Bachelor Science degree in Computer Science in a few weeks after my university finishes processing all my records and stuff.

One of the things I never, ever, ever got the chance to learn was writing compilers, or at least interpreters (it's probably easier to learn interpreters first before attempting to write a compiler for any given language, yes?). Sure, I did write a simple calculator program that allowed for parenthetical notation using a stack which gave me a very basic and simple idea of how parsers work, but that hardly was enough experience to dive in and attempt writing an interpreter.

Local bookstores aren't exactly filled to the brim with books on advanced topics like these in their Computing aisles, so browsing and leafing through the pages before I buy isn't necessarily an option for me. I notice there's many books on Amazon.com, but considering how freakishly expensive they all are, I'd rather not empty a paycheck on a ton of books about writing compilers or interpreters. Can someone with experience in this subject recommend one or two -definitive- books that cover most of what I need to know? I've read customer reviews on most of what I saw, and there seems to be serious pros and cons to all of these sources. A frequent complaint about "the dragon book" is that it doesn't cover object-oriented languages, but I'm not interested in that anyway. And some people say it's easy to understand, other people say it's convoluted and mazey in its explanations. And would buying a book on -compilers- be overkill if all I want to do is dabble in writing my own -interpreter- (I have, specificially, LISP or something LISP-ish in mind) from scratch?

Sorry if this question is worded in a rather roundabout manner. I just want to teach myself the general science and fundamental theories of writing interpreters and/or compilers so I have something that's actually substantial on my résumé, which is currently populated by tumbleweed, dust, and a couple of lazy cows, but I'm not about to spend well over $500 on a whole bunch of books on this subject, of which only one or two might actually be easy to comprehend. --I am not good at running 21:57, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Compilers: Principles, Techniques and Tools is a classic on compilers (and parsing, which you will also need for an interpreter). 21st Century Compilers is supposed to be it's successor. (Academic) books are a lot cheaper in Europe, so if you happen to be in the neighbourhood... —Ruud 22:28, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
A useful companion book for that is Lex & Yacc, which is a practical guide to using the most common parser generator tool. It's not cheap, of course :( --Robert Merkel 01:44, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
For interpreters, Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs by Abelson and Sussmann is the classic textbook (especially if you like Lisp). Gdr 23:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Yup, and you don't have to fork out for it as it's available for free online along with videos. You might also want to take a look at Parrot. There's a great book on Parsing Techniques available for free here (the second edition is due out next month). Currently listed as $175 second hand on Amazon, so you owe me a pint :-) chocolateboy 06:55, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
They're a real "work-in-progress" at the moment, but you should check out Wikibooks, a source of free online textbooks written by volunteers as a sister project to Wikipedia. They have a book on wikibooks:Compiler Construction. And when you're an expert on writing compilers, you can help rewrite the text book! --Canley 23:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I can always recommend the Art of Computer Programming, but unfortunately the Volume that handles compiler technique is not yet written. helohe (talk) 23:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps it tells you something about the difficulty of writing about language processors. The Art of Computer Programming was supposed to be a book about writing compilers. 'Strue. And Knuth started writing it in 1962, and he hasn't got to the part about the compilers yet... --Anon, 04:52 UTC, January 11.

[edit] Starry Decisis

In the Alito confirmation, they keep saying something latin that sounds like the above. What's it mean? Black Carrot 23:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

See stare decisis. Gdr 23:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Which would have been an appropriate question at the language desk. hydnjo talk 00:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about that. Black Carrot 01:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course, that only becomes clear once you know what it is. Asking a question in the "wrong" place is no crime. - Nunh-huh 02:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
True, but I could have guessed from context that it wasn't a science question, and language really would be the best place for it. I just wasn't thinking. 'Course, didn't do much damage anyway. Black Carrot 04:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Question to hydnjo: Why the italics? Black Carrot 04:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 11

[edit] masses of air pressure

What do masses of air do as they go through the troposphere? Does it have anything to do with expansion or compression?

The troposphere is a mass of air. I think you want Air mass and/or Weather front. —James S. 07:30, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Electronic Monitoring of the Workplace

Greetings:

Does anyone know of any journal articles or books that provide a survey/list of current/past technologies used in the electronic surveillance of the workplace? (I can think of phone tapping, firewalling and email monitoring, but there must be more than that!!!)

I have used Google's Scholar on this topic, yet all articles that show up talk about the pros and cons, and ethical issues surrounding electronic surveillance at workplace, not about the technologies used in performing electronic surveillance.

Regards,

129.97.252.63 03:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

One I've heard of is using computers with voice recognition software to determine whether "private phone call" words are being used by employees on the phone, versus "work-related words". This allows mgmt to have some idea how much time people spend each day on private phone calls without anyone actually eavesdropping. Of course, video cameras are in widespread use in many industries, ostensibly to watch customers, but frequently aimed at cashiers, etc., not at the customers. StuRat 05:30, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! 129.97.252.63 04:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WAOL?

Can AOL run without WAOL? This is nonsense. I have a cable modem but chew up 90% of my bandwidth and system resources with this dinasaur of a browser thing, does anyone know of a way to connect to an AOL based cable modem, without the AOL "shell"?--172.151.77.58 03:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Have you considered getting another ISP? hydnjo talk 19:43, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] motion of electrons

why do electrons revolve around the nucleus??? From where do they get the energy to revolve??? if electorns do revolve around the nucleus,then why dont we feel a vibration when we touch a substance??? Thanks for spending u r valuable time in reading n answering this question. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.214.168.155 (talk • contribs).

Your question tells me that you have a meager and unsatisfactory understanding about the subject of your question. Start with reading Particle physics and then follow some of the links there. You will, after that, have some questions to ask here and we will welcome them. hydnjo talk 04:39, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
That was a bit uncalled for. Unsatisfactory according to whose standards? Meager according to whose yardstick? People asking questions are implicitly acknowledging their understanding is less than they would like to to be. That's why they ask the question in the first place. JackofOz 07:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
You're right, that was a bit uncalled for and I apologize to the questioner. hydnjo talk 17:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree; the questioner's "unsatisfactory understanding" is the reason for the question. I'm not sure if Particle physics is such a good place to start, but Atomic orbital, while completely on-topic, is far too advanced to serve this questioner's purpose. How's this:
  • Electrons orbit the nucleus because they are attracted to the positive charge of the nucleic protons, but as fermions they are not capable of occupying the same phase space as the nucleons, so thanks to wave-particle duality, they form a three-dimensional standing wave in orbit about the nucleus instead of coliding with it.
  • There is no energy expended in electron orbitals, because as the smallest form of ordinary matter, electrons encounter no friction, drag, or similar resistance. They stay in orbits because of their electric charge attraction to protons. If they are disturbed, they either leave orbit, ionizing the atom or molecule, or enter a different excitation state, from where they might release a photon to return to their ground state. This is why you see light when crushing Wint-O-Green LifeSavers in the dark (try it!)
  • To begin with, the tiny size of even the largest electron orbital, on the order of a couple Angstroms, is about a millionth of the diameter of the neurons with which you sense physical vibration. But electron orbitals are neutral with respect to mechanical vibration because of their nature as a standing wave of charge-balanced fermions. Moreover, all atoms and molecules -- every bit of matter in the world except fire -- has this same nature. Even if electron orbitals did exert a mechanical force, it would be dwarfed by the thermal vibration of molecules which produces Brownian motion. —James S. 07:55, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Rather than beat each other with sackcloth, it would be interesting if the questioner found *any* of this useful. --Zeizmic 21:23, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] chimeric two fathers

Has there ever been documented a chimeric (especialy human) with two different fathers? ~~zh

  • It is not possible for an mammalian egg to be fertilized twice, once the ovum fuses with a single sperm cell, its cell membrane changes, preventing fusion with other sperm. If by some weird chain of events two sperm made it in, further cell division to make an embryo would be a problem as there would be 3 sets of chromosomes.--nixie 05:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
    • True, but a chimera has cells from different cell lines, not doubly-fertilized cells. To answer zh, yes, there have been a few document cases: see chimera (genetics) for more information. — Knowledge Seeker দ 05:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Knowledge Seeker, but I don't see anything in that article that talks about a chimera with two fathers, it only talks about having different cells (presumebly both lines from the same parents)~~zh (p.s. thanks nixie too for your try)

      • I'd imagine that its highly unlikey that you could get a tetragametic chimera with two fathers unless you were really trying - female on fertilty drugs to release multiple ova and multiple sexual partners in succession, and even then there is only a tiny chance of it occuring.--nixie 05:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you nixie but dont forget there are 7,000,000,000 people in the world ~~zh

You're right, zh. The rate of heteropaternal superfecundation is very low, and the rate of chimera formation is also probably very low, so the chances of them both happening are very low indeed. I would assume, though, that it must have happened more than once in the 150,000 or so–year-history of our species. But as Nixie says, it would be much more like if one is trying to do it with multiple sexual partners and fertility drugs. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why do dogs chase cats?

What is the explanation for this phenomenom? Thanks

Don't dogs chase everything squirrels, cars, bikes? Maybe there are more cats so it just seems like they chase cats more often? David D. (Talk) 05:43, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Dogs chase things, especially potential prey, because of their instincts as predators. There might be a bowl of kibble waiting for them in the doghouse, but their genes allow them no more resistance to the chase than yours allow you to resist daydreaming about attractive members of the opposite sex. —James S. 08:26, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm strong enough to resist my daydreaming, thank you very much! Anyway, civilisation is not the not having of uncivilised thoughts, but what you do with them. Aparrently dogs aren't civilised. :)
But somewhat more seriously, why do they chase cats? I thought carnivores didn't eat carnivores. Potential competitors? Or are they defending the territory? Of course, dogs are pretty degenerate when it comes to natural instincts, so that's not likely to be a very good explanation of their actions. They're extra fierce around their home turf, but can be agressive elsewhere too. DirkvdM 10:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
One major reason is that most cats run away from them. Those cool cats that don't move when they see a dog are merely studied with some curiosity. David Sneek 12:49, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Don't dogs also chase other dogs, and people, when their territory is challenged? Black Carrot 13:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


Well,they do chase people and other dogs sometimes,but it seems like dogs are chasing cats whenever they see them...Etc.when dog see another dog or man,he may just ignore it,or play with it,but when dog see a cat,its a must that he will chase it...That was my question...Thank you again 194.106.189.134 00:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

This is not the case in my experience of dogs. Do cats have the same instinct with mice? See this link for refutation. ;-) David D. (Talk) 00:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Awwwwww! Black Carrot 00:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Seriously, though, dogs don't always chase cats, and cats don't always chase mice. I've never owned a dog, so I can't shed much light on that beyond my above experience with those of neighbors, but I do know cats. My family has owned quite a few cats over the years, with a wide range of habits and temperaments. There have been quite a few avid hunters and huntresses who would gladly stalk, kill, and sometimes leave on our porch anything smaller than they were, including but not limited to: mice(we tried to take care of some twice, they didn't last long), rabbits(funny story there), baby rabbits(one of our early cats cleaned out the entire area, none left), smaller cats(more a territory thing), squirrels, birds, lizards, roaches, moths, string, leaves, points of light on the ground. We have one now that is vigorously opposed to any form of food not hard, bread-based, and dispensed from a bag, and another who, though he chases everything, apparently has no idea that small animals are edible. Considering the variety in cats, and their general love of slaughter if they like killing at all, I suspect they used to chase mice and rats constantly and exclusively mostly because that was the main type of vermin available. I would bet, similarly, that most dogs chase cats who are trained to chase everthing, and as seen above, not all chase anything. Black Carrot 01:10, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quarks

What occurs after a down quark switches to an up quark?

It starts to look more "butch" ? StuRat 12:40, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
In order for that to occur, a weak interaction must take place. The conservation of mass dictates that one up quark worth of mass must be converted to energy, and a positron's worth of charge must be consumed, somehow. I think it would count as a "weak decay" were it not for the charge difference. What makes you think that a down quark ever does become an up quark? —James S. 08:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Er...isn't that what happens when a neutron undergoes beta decay into a proton, electron, and electron anti-neutrino? I'm assuming that's where the questioner got the idea from. The change from the -1/3 charge of the down quark to the +2/3 of the up quark is balanced by the emission of the electron. — Knowledge Seeker দ 09:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah-ha! I thought there was a good reason for the question! —James S. 09:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Two penises

Don't ask why, but a friend of mine wants to know what the medical name would be for the condition of having two penises (presumptively we're talking about humans here). Anyone know? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 06:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

why? -User:Lommer | talk 06:20, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Diphallia got it from google. David D. (Talk) 06:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Note that some creatures always have two, like sharks. StuRat 07:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
"It is commonly mistaken that all sharks have this condition, but in reality they have a pair of "claspers" which serve a reproductive function." --Diphallia article
Two guys? Sorry. :) DirkvdM 10:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps Dante's friend was playing an old edition of Trivial Pursuit that included the question "What does a man have if he suffers from diphallic terata?" and was suspicious of the answer given. Note: I'm quoting that from memory and it was 20 years since I came across the question. What is supposed to be the same edition, in the version of the game sold in my country, doesn't have it. It stuck in my mind not only because I didn't think they would have dared to ask about that, but also because "terata" didn't sound like the right form; but I could be wrong. --Anonymous, 16:52 UTC, January 11, 2006.
Trivial Pursuit also asked what polyorchidism is. Maybe the writers were just stuck on that topic. --Kainaw (talk) 02:01, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
"Brokeback Mountain". Ba-dum-bum. Thank you. We'll be here all week. - Nunh-huh 02:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I prefer to call it "Bareback Mountain", in honor of those gay cowboys who apparently enjoyed "riding bareback". StuRat 06:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Heh. Black Carrot 04:42, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] molecular biology

define below plasmids:

           pWWO plasmid.
           pBR322 plasmid.
           pJLR200 plasmid.
Those are designations of plasmids: pWWO database record, alternate pWWO record -- I can't find the other two in databases; only mentioned in passing in the same Google search you've probably already done. —James S. 09:55, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The pBR322 plasmid is widely used, see also PBR322. There is a company that sells the pJLR200 plasmid, which seems to be a derivative of pBR322 (see). --JWSchmidt 00:24, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Health effects of rapid temperature changes

Are there any health effects of having your body undergo rapid changes in exterior temperature? For instance, at the end of a (warm/hot) shower, briefly turning the water to "cold" before turning it off, or going from a sauna into the snow (or even a frozen lake!!) and back again? Personally, I feel invigorated after the former (and am not brave enough to try the latter), but was wondering if this kind of rapid cooling off had any other benefits? I presume it's not harmful (except perhaps by causing a heart attack through shock in extreme cases), but is it in some way beneficial beyond the psychological feeling of being refreshed? TIA! — QuantumEleven | (talk) 12:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Looking at this, I stumbled upon Warm-blooded, which is neat, and worth reading. Nearly all serious effects have to do with altering the core body temperature, and a quick roll in the snow after a sauna isn't going to do that. --Zeizmic 15:59, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, it is putting stress on the body, and if you were particularly susceptible to heart attacks, this is the type of thing which might trigger one. For most people though, this should not cause any problems. StuRat 02:16, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Electricity from lightning

I see that the Empire State Building in New York gets struck by lightning about 15 times a year - why can't we wire up the roof to a big battery & catch all the energy put out by a lightning bolt? AllanHainey 12:48, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Once again I went to THE BOX, and typed in 'lightning'. Now, I know the answer and I'm not going to tell you.... --Zeizmic 13:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I think there was an episode of Transformers where they did this ... Proto t c 13:08, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I did read the Lightning article but it didn't answer my question, if you managed to figure out an answer from the complex scientific bits of it please let me know as I didn't really understand some bits of it. AllanHainey 14:25, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
A battery can only be charged gradually, using a continuous supply of electricity. A flash of lightning happens too quickly for it to be of any practical use. Also, lightning takes the path of least resistance, so even if you could stick some sort of storage device in its path it would simply avoid it.--Shantavira 15:30, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Having read the relevant sections is always a good thing to mention. You will have noticed what happened to the various people who tried to heat their houses with wired kites in thunderstorms. It's just too friggin' dangerous! That's the answer without the complex bits. On a scientific level (to inflate my opinion of myself), we engineers always have a problem with converting a high-density energy source to a lower density. Take nuclear power; you can't take useful energy out of a nuclear bomb! You have to go through all sorts of complex bits to fire up lightbulbs with it. --Zeizmic 15:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
My experiment doesn't use lightning. I work on the 11th floor. I put an antenna the pressure-hole in my window frame and connected it by an insulated wire to a multimeter. I connected the other end to the sink's cold water pipe. I got almost no voltage (0.4V) and almost no amps. Then, when the wind picked up the voltage picked up (just breaking 3V once). I did it again now and then, but I never get any amperage of note and the voltage isn't high enough to reduce it and create some amps. Perhaps you can think of a way to trickle a charge a battery with a similar setup. --Kainaw (talk) 21:26, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Some people over at the Halfbakery have discussed this. Before you get too excited, I suspect that there's not as much energy in lightning as people think. "500 megajoules" sounds big, but it's only 140 kilowatt-hours, which is worth about 100 quid at UK prices. You would have to capture lightning over a huge area to make a scheme worthwhile. --Heron 22:08, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Imagine your big battery comes to life as Frankenstein's creature did ? --Harvestman 22:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hybrid Car

Please give me the name of the world's first Hybrid car? --61.1.228.25 13:43, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

See Hybrid vehicle. The history section there should help you. Thryduulf 14:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What does boron react with?

hydrogen, flourine, chlorine, bromine, iodine, oxygen, sulphur, nitrogen and anything else with the right valence and electronegativity. [50] —James S. 18:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Webster's defintion of life and person in 1847

I am looking for and online dictionary that would have definitions from Meriam Webster (started in 1847) or other dictionaries that would included defintions of life and person at the time or even four years before 1847.

Thanks, Ken

email me at (Ever heard of "spam"?)

This is a Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities question, not a science question. —James S. 22:09, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I could not get anymore than I already have. If I do, oh well. Thanks anyway. If it were my primary account then I would not have used it. Thanks mommy.

[edit] Software for creating simple drawings and figures

I was just asked the following question: "What's the best, easiest software that would allow a novice to create a simple drawing with words and images?" And suggestions? Guettarda 19:11, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Going with a typical Windows platform, likely either Paint or PowerPoint (or another presentation program) — Lomn | Talk / RfC 19:16, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Inkscape - it's free, fast, and you can be productive with a minute's worth of learning; best of all it's got lots of power under the hood (unlike things like paint) so you won't have to drop it and learn something new when you want to do something more complex. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
FAST? You must be joking! Inkskape has the slowest GUI I've ever seen, and buggy as well. The program itself is nice, but you probably need Pentium 3000 or higher to use it. Grue 11:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ati2dvag.dll

Hello, and I hope you can shed some light on this. Closing the lid and walking away is supposed to be supported on my Dell Inspiron 5100 (Win XP). Opening the lid is then supposed to restore whatever was running. But consistently when I do so and come back a couple of hours later, the screen is blue. The error message points a finger at ati2dvag.dll. I've looked on the Web for information about this component and what to do about the problem, but the information is way over my head. Of course I can always reboot and use my computer without problems if I don't close the case and go away with programs running. I've done so 6-8 times. So maybe I should just let it be. But I'm curious: what's happening? Is there anything I could do to make a fix? Any technical knowledge I used to have was at a considerably higher level. Thanks, Halcatalyst 19:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

It's just as likely that you are overheating. You won't get a good answer here, or perhaps anywhere. Sorry. --Zeizmic 19:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Judging by the name of the dll, it looks like it's part of your video card driver. I'd suggest upgrading your ATI driver. enochlau (talk) 23:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I have XP/SP2. Checking out the system information, I see the following devices: ACPI Lid, ACPI Power Button, ACPI Sleep Button, ACPI Thermal Zone. Windows says they are all working, but Windows has been wrong before <g>. It didn't tell me anything about ATI. I'd appreciate any other insights or suggestions. Thanks, Halcatalyst 02:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Looking further, I discovered my laptop has the Mobility Radeon 7500c (ATI) video driver, and that Windows had a wizard I could use to update it. The wizard said it would check locally, the CD if I had it, and even go out to the Web. But since I didn't produce the CD, it just gave up after searching locally. Now I'm trying to find the CD, which, like any dumb user, I put away somewhere I can't remember now. Halcatalyst 02:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Just a quick look at Google indicates many people have problems with ATI cards. Dell uses ATI because they are cheap. It helps them the price low on their products. Cheap hardware, buggy drivers and a brain dead operating system are almost guaranteed to produce problem like this. You get what you pay for. I have also found that suspend and power management are problematic functions on computers to start with. I've seen it cause no end of problems. On my own boxes one of the first things I do is go in the BIOS and disable as many of the power management "features" I can. On a laptop, if you don't plan on using it for a couple of hours shut it down.--◀Pucktalk▶ 16:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I doubt it's an overheat - your error message indeed looks like graphics card trouble. Something you can try - what's your computer trying to do when you close the lid (check Control Panel -> Power, there should be a tab which controls what your computer tries to do when you close the lid). Stand by? Hibernate? Try doing these things manually (Start -> Shut Down -> Stand By / Hibernate), and see if they work correctly. If they don't, you've found the problem - your graphics card driver doesn't support one or the other function. If they do, then it seems to be a problem with the lid closing... in that case, try standing by / hibernating the computer and then closing the lid, it doesn't take a lot of extra time, and it might work well then. In any case, updating your driver is probably a good start - check out ATI's website and find the latest driver that supports your card (it's a bit old, so you may have to dig around a bit). Good luck! — QuantumEleven | (talk) 17:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to all for your responses. Halcatalyst 14:36, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

  • This morning, after settting the power button to do nothing when the lid closes, I closed the lid with programs running. A couple of hours later, pop the lid and voilà! everything saved and working as designed. Halcatalyst 17:40, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I guess the machine got tired of sleeping. Halcatalyst 17:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Long-distance communication

I was reading somewhere recently that the long-distance communication common in sci-fi books/movies/etc. (i.e., communication between people/spacecraft at different planets, different stars, different galaxies) would be impossible because the limit to the speed of light means that communication between even Earth and Mars would have a minutes-long delay, and across stars would have a years-long delay. But isn't there something in quantum physics where making one particle spin one way makes another particle spin the other way at the exact same time, no matter how far away the particles are? Wouldn't it be possible to communicate via these spins (maybe one spin=0 and the other =1 and then read it via computer)? Zafiroblue05 20:23, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

It's called quantum entanglement - you might want to read the article on it. To summarise, you can transmit information faster than light, but not useful information. Don't ask me why! --Heron 20:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Why? I was given the glove example. We both get a box. One has a right hand glove and the other has a left hand glove. We travel to opposite sides of the Earth. I open my box and see a right hand glove. Faster than light, I gather information about the contents of your box on the other side of the Earth. It isn't useful information, but it is information. Now, don't ask me why this precludes quantum entanglement. --Kainaw (talk) 21:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Same as Heron stated : a single glove is not very useful. --Harvestman 22:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
With quantum entanglement, you can't affect the state of the entangled pairs. More info here. —James S. 22:14, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
As I understand it, the gloves (prior to be being observed) would have both been in the wavelike state inside the box, so the probability field is distributed more or less evenly, allowing the gloves to have the effect of either left-handed gloves or right-handed gloves from inside the box. As soon as the state of one glove is known, the probability field of the other glove is restricted, which limits what the glove can affect (or do). I know the commonsense version seems like the only way it could happen, but those knowledgeable sciency types say QM is real and it doesn't make sense to anybody. Tzarius 22:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Any form of long distance communication for which the phone company can't bill is clearly illegal and any physicists who disagree will be arrested. StuRat 06:43, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coloring around the anus

Our article on the anus states: "Anal bleaching is a relatively new West coast phenomenon where the perineum, which darkens over the years, is lightened for a more youthful appearance." Although the article doesn't say why this coloration happens. What is the cause of this? My first guess would be staining by the feces that pass by that part of the skin but if the skin is shed, why would it become discolored more as we advance in age? Dismas|(talk) 20:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe they do, but there is still no ambigity because nowhere except on our beloved West Coast could such a thing be conceived! alteripse 11:19, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I dunno, they're pretty wild and wacky people in Perth and especially Geraldton, Western Australia --Robert Merkel 11:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
It wasn't my markup, I just copied and pasted from the page in question. Dismas|(talk) 15:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Your theory sounds reasonable. Specifically, it might be stained by bile in the feces. StuRat 09:33, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Next question! --Zeizmic 21:24, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Get the patent on that. You can make millions by making people feel inadequate. Especially politicians. Maybe you can get Arnold to do tv ads. GangofOne 17:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

You the hell cares about their anus that much unless they are gay? by: painintheass

Girls? 69.154.179.63 00:45, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smokeless tobacco

Is there any known research that using smokeless tobacco increases sex drive in males? Anyone every hear of this in single case studies?

I don't think there is. As far as I know, any research on smokeless tobacco would also have to be conducted on smoking tobacco as well, which would possibly yield the same results. However, I suggest you check Ig Nobel and see what they have, considering the line of research this is. --JB Adder | Talk 21:50, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Nicotine is a stimulant, which will increase activity in general. Poking around on Medline unconclusively suggests that nicotine might affect testosterone levels but not necessarily libido. —James S. 22:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
No and No. alteripse 05:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Smoking Causes Male Sexual Impotence. But I'm guessing you knew that already... chocolateboy 07:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Electricity

Who is credited with being the person who discovered electricity?

This is an encyclopedia, see electricity. Dismas|(talk) 23:20, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
This is the reference desk (science section) at the Wikipedia Encyclopedia and some part of your question may indeed be answered at the electricity article. There you will find that a form of electricity was known to the ancient Greeks. hydnjo talk 23:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Serious. We also have a duty to try to get the people to read the upper section of this reference desk. The word mollycoddle is being moved to the Wiktionary. --Zeizmic 00:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Mr. Serious being who, Mr. seismic or whomever? And, mollycoddle is as mollycoddle does, ya know!
Hmm, methinks I see Mr. Taskmaster lurking hereabouts, do I not? Oooh and by the way we tremble at your very mini tremble. Please don't be a dick. hydnjo talk 01:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 12

[edit] Computer Question

How can I input data to a computer accurately?

Umm, after you input the data, check it for accuracy. Like, after I write this comment I should look back at my Wikipedia input with Show preview to see if my edit looks like I want it to look. I can make this look any way I want it to look. There is no replacement for your looking over your own input to see that it is what you meant to input. hydnjo talk 04:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
If there is any way to avoid manual input, that's almost always an improvement. For example, if the data is printed out from some other program, devise a way to send the output to a file, and read it from the new program, instead of manually reentering the data. StuRat 05:11, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, there is a reasonable "substitute for looking over your own input": that's to enter everything twice (or even more times!) and have the computer compare the two versions, then fix the differences. It's better yet if someone else enters it the second time, as you might have some habitual errors and if you make the same one twice in the same place it won't be seen. But, yes, carefully looking it over is good as well.
There are also tricks to help focus your attention when you are looking it over. Put it aside for a few minutes before you start, so you come back to it fresh; read it aloud as you go, so you don't skip over bits; read it in some other sequence, like backwards (for text) or in single-digit columns (for tables of numbers), or that sort of thing, so you don't think about what it means.
And of course avoiding manual input is even better... if you have a trusted machine-readable source.
--Anonymous, 06:43 UTC, January 12, 2006.

Practice. A lot. I've seen touch typers work at 80 wpm (speech is around 60ish WPM) with zero errors. After a couple of decades of practice. Syntax 18:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stream Development/Landscape Development

Four stages in a streams development - Mature, Old Age, and a young/new stream

What would the fourth stage be?

could not find an entry pertaining to this, maybe someone can point me too one. thanks.

  1. Youthful
  2. Mature
  3. Old Age
  4. Rejuvinated [51]
See also: [52] and [53] —James S. 05:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lucifer to Iapetus

In the Space Odyssey series by Arthur C. Clarke, the new mini-sun Lucifer is created using Jupiter. What would Lucifer's predicted effects on Saturn and Mars be? Iapetus? Please be sure to include all information you can think of, including radiological effects; climate, tidal force, or orbital changes; etc. Here7ic 04:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

It's hard to answer simply because this is purely speculative, rather than science-grounded, fiction. Let's assume Jupiter could really ignite as-is. There would be no orbital changes, as the mass of Jupiter is unchanged. However, Jupiter has only about 1/80 of the necessary mass for stellar fusion, so any estimate of radiological effects, etc, is sheer guesswork: no stars exist on that scale.
If, however, you really want to extrapolate, I would assume that Lucifer has stellar characteristics akin to that of Sol. You could then determine the relative energy reaching a given body like Mars from Sol vs from Lucifer, bearing in mind that while Mars keeps a nearly-constant distance from Sol, it has a widely varying distance from Jupiter. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 05:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Now, if you can/will, please apply a change in Jupiters mass. Perhaps twofold? 198.110.63.66 17:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
It's much more fun to play around and discover for yourself. Try a solar system simulator, like [54] --Fangz 20:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Medical Problems

How do you get a stye in the eye?

Search first - it's quicker. If you use the search box on the left of the screen, you'll quickly find stye; they are the result of a bacterial infection. They can be quite uncomfortable (I know, I had one on Christmas Day)...--Robert Merkel 07:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] hearing different sounds simultaneously

i have read that sound reaches from the source to the receiver by the vibration of air particles.in that case when two people are speaking at the same time,when the vibration of air paticles from first speaker reaches my ears the vibration from the second speaker will also reach my ears at the same time.then they shold collide with each other and i shouldnt be able to hear their voices.But this is not what is happening.HOW????thanks for spending u r time in responding to my question.

When two waves overlap they don't necessarily cancel each other out. If you think of sound waves as sine waves, they would cancel each other out only when 180 degrees out of phase. If they were in phase with each other, they would actually reinforce each other to double the volume. To put it another way, a sound combined with the same sound will double the volume, while a sound combined with the opposite sound will cancel each other out. Since two different people speaking will generate two different sounds, parts will be cancelled and parts will be reinforced. And, since the two sounds will reach each ear at different times, different cancellation and reinforcemnt will happen in each ear. Your brain can usually figure out and fill in the missing parts, but, as you know, it is a bit more difficult to hold a conversation when other people are talking around you, since your brain can't fill in all the gaps. StuRat 05:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
This is true, but misses an important point: cancellation only happens when the frequency (pitch) of the two sounds is identical. Sound waves of different frequencies will not interfere with each other; the air molecules will move in a way that combines the two wave motions. As mentioned at ear (but, oddly, not at cochlea or organ of Corti), the ear has separate sensors that respond to different frequencies of sound; if a tone of 200 Hz and one of 300 Hz are both sounded at once, the combined wave motion will still stimulate the two corresponding sensors and you will hear a combination of both tones (like a musical chord, although that term normally implies that there are at least three tones). Speech is much more complicated, with multiple tones sounding at once from different parts of mouth and throat; interference simply is not an issue. --Anonymous, 07:00 UTC, January 12, 2006.

Thank you !!!

[edit] Nasal snuff and health

What are the health risks and benefits of (dry) snuff? Mysteriousinventors 05:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Benefits: Unclogs the nose. Smoke-free, no secondhand smoke. Mild stimulant. Like other smokeless tobacco products, poses far less risk to users than cigarette smoking. The WHO states "There is *inadequate* evidence that nasal use of snuff is carcinogenic to humans."{emphasis in original}

Cancer risk: Inconclusive. Studies have documented cancer in African users of snuff adulterated with charred aloe stems. Another report exists of a man contracting squamous cell carcinoma from placing snuff (presumably nasal snuff, as opposed to oral moist snuff, but this isn't specified) in his ear, an area that also receives UV radiation from the sun. Another report found a fourfold risk or oral cancer in persons using American dry snuff on the gums. There are currently no reports linking nasal cancer to European nasal snuff (with or without confounders like smoking, industrial chemical exposures, etc.), but this may be more a reflection on the paucity of studies examining nasal snuff than it may be on snuff's possible risks.

Sources: WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans Volume 37 Tobacco Habits other than Smoking; Betel-Quid and Areca-Nut Chewing; and some Related Nitrosamines Summary of Data Reported and Evaluation Last updated: 21 April 1998

J Laryngol Otol. 2003 Sep;117(9):686-91. Nasal snuff: historical review and health related aspects.

BMC Public Health. 2005; 5: 31. You might as well smoke; the misleading and harmful public message about smokeless tobacco.

Russell et al., A New Age for Snuff?, The Lancet, Mar. 1980) (author published another study on the subject in 1981; Nicotine intake by snuff users. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1981 Sep 26;283(6295):814-7.).

More links to more sources found here: http://snufftalk.org/viewtopic.php?t=81

Risks: Cancer. StuRat 06:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I've done a goodly amount of research, and I can't actually find much of anything linking nasal snuff to cancer. Mysteriousinventors 06:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually the Tobacco article says that it can help with hay fever, by clogging up the nose. I'd be careful about the cancer claim. The links between non-smoking tobacco and cancer are less clear. For instance the link between Snus and cancer is still hotly debated, with many inconclusive studies. (to the extent that the Swedish government had the 'causes cancer' warning labels on wet-snuff products replaced with 'damaging to your health' ones). I don't advocate nicotine use, but as an alternative to smoking almost any other form of nicotine seems far less hazardous. --BluePlatypus 06:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I suppose their is a benefit to me of other people using snuff. They will get cancer and die without ever giving me cancer, unlike with cigs. StuRat 06:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

It's not exactly a health benefit, but the miniscule byproducts of dry snuff (mainly from sneezing) are socially acceptable—unlike smoke and large amounts of sticky, foul-smelling saliva—so one can use it almost anywhere. My mother used to take it for its stimulant properties during afternoon classes in grad school, where smoking was prohibited, spittoons were not provided :-), and coffee had long ago worn off. (People did think she was using cocaine, but this was in New York in the early 1970s. . .) —Charles P. (Mirv) 19:04, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cell referencing in Excel

Hi. Let's say I have a row full of numbers (row A). Using the vlookup function I want to obtain the cell that a certain value can be found. So for example, if row A column 3 has the number 17, and I search for the number 17 using vlookup, I want the result to be R[A]C[3] (or whatever the syntax may be), so the result I am looking for is the cell itself, not the value contained in it. Is this possible to do? If so how? Thank you. - Akamad 07:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, I worked it out. - Akamad 07:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, scratch that, the way I did it was a long winded way, and I'm hoping there is an easier way so I'll put the question back on the table. Thanks :-) Akamad 08:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Computer

How can i input data to a computer accurately?

Learn touch typing. Seriously, you're going to have to be a bit more specific if you want a useful answer. What kind of data? What is the source of this data (your head, handwritten text, printed text, your boss's voice, something else entirely)? --Robert Merkel 07:42, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
one (expensive) method for ensuring accuracy is to have the data input two times (once each by two different people) and then compared. Where the two agree, they are likely to be correct; where they disagree, a further look is in order. - Nunh-huh 08:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Read way above: don't double post and be specific. DirkvdM 11:27, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] radio frequency

How does radio frequency work without interference from other frequencies?

Radios would use a filter to filter out the unwanted frequencies. This website shows some pictures of waves in different frequencies. The second picture shows a graph with 4 different frequencies. So a radio can, on this example, filter out all frequencies except that at 1kHz (if you wanted to "listen" to the information provided on the 1kHz band). - Akamad 08:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Waves of different wavelengths can pass right thru each other without affecting one another. You can see this with water waves sometimes. This is a basic feature of waves. StuRat 08:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] computer

How can i identify and correct my own mistakes after i input data to a computer?

Read through it and check to see if you inputted what you wanted to. - Akamad 08:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
You could also consider doing your own homework. --Robert Merkel 08:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

If you can print it out in the exact same format as you had to start with, you can hold the two pages up, one on top of the other, to the light, and any differences should jump out at you. There is also a "diff" function on many computers that will find any differences in the two, automatically. However, again they must be in the same format for this to work. StuRat 08:58, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Computer question

How can i add reference codes when required?

[edit] micosoft word

how to add reference codes in Microsoftword?

[edit] Dog and Fox

No, it's not a question about pub names. Can you cross a fox with a dog? Using the same logic applied to ligers, zonkeys and wolphins, I looked up both fog (which is, of course, something else) and dox (no dice). And I couldn't see anything on the fox or dog articles. In the canine hybrids category, I found wolfdogs, coydogs and coywolfs (coywolves?) - again, no foxdogs or dogfoxes. So, could this be done? Proto t c 09:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

And here I thought this was about jumping. Femto 12:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think so. Foxes have 34 pairs of chromosomes, dogs have 39 pairs, so they don't match up. David Sneek 10:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
David is right, interspecific hybrids are only possible if the chromosome numbers are fairly similar, eg donkeys has 62 and horses have 64, so you can get the sterile mule with 63.--nixie 10:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Aha. That makes sense. God bless List of number of chromosomes of various organisms. Follow up question - both cats and pigs have 38 pairs of chromosomes - could we have a catpig? Or half-cow, half gypsy moth (cowth? No, wait, moo-th!) And hares have the same amount as humans ... or is the thought of a "human hare" just too freaky? Proto t c 11:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
It's probably not just the number of chromosomes that matters, but also the compatibility of the genetic information they carry. The really existing examples you give above suggest that interspecific breeding only works with animals that belong to the same family; the parents of a liger are both felidae, a wolphin's mother and father are both part the delphinidae family, a coywolf's parents are canidae, etc. David Sneek 12:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
That makes sense. Thanks, David. No cow moths (I'm going to copyright moo-ths, just in case) in the forseeable future ... bah. ;) Proto t c 13:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
If you're not restricting this to conventional breeding and allow genetic engineering, there are spidergoats. [55] Femto 13:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
That...is...AWESOME!!! Black Carrot 18:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Other than ethics, morality and queasiness, could a human mate with a chimpanzee and produce viable offspring? User:Zoe|(talk) 00:56, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
It was going to be tried, see Ilya Ivanovich Ivanov (biologist), but the experiments never happened. Humans have 23 sets of chromosomes and the great apes have 24, since great apes can't form hybrids with each other even with idential chromosome numbers, humans are possibly also too different to make human/primate hybrids.--nixie 01:05, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually accordingly to Ivanov's article, he did inseminate female chimpanzees with human sperm. Nothing came out of it, and plans to try inseminating human women with chimp sperm never panned out. Isomorphic 06:57, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Catalsyt

I would like to know the name of a catalyst that can convert molecular hydrogen to atomic hydrogen i.e. nascent hydrogen and how to use the catalyst.

I suggest you take a look at this page, but don't think ti'll be that easy to do it in your basement... Mariano(t/c) 14:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why are Marsupials confined to the Australian continent?

They aren't. But most species occur there. See Marsupial, specifically "There are between 260 and 280 species of marsupials, almost 200 of them native to Australia and nearby islands to the north. There are also many extant species in South America and one species, the Virginia Opossum, native to North America." Rmhermen 15:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

They can't swim well enough to get off. That's where they evolved. GangofOne 17:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Or, more to the point, the placental mammals that seem to have driven them nearly extinct elsewhere couldn't swim well enough to get to Australia, so the marsupials were left in peace there. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 00:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Not quite: They evolved when Australia was still connected to South America. When the latter eventually connected to North America, species from the two continents could intermingle, and many marsupials didn't survive the competition. Some are doing quite well, however, as my opossum-hunting dog could attest. – ClockworkSoul 13:46, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Units of Permeability

Permeability is measured in Darcies (D)or milliDarcies, based upon the work of Henry Darcy (circa 1856), but who in more modern times, re-wrote the equation in the familar form and coined the descriptive name (Darcy) of the unit? I have serched the net to no avail so far??

Any help is much appreciated

Craig Lindsay

---207.218.155.21 13:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Then you didn't search enough. See darcy. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 13:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I did see this page, but it still dosn't tell me my answer. The unit the Darcy was proposed by someone at a later date. Who was it and when? Thanks anyway.

[edit] Modular Design

What is Modular Design in computers?

Same as modular design in other things (eg cars, fridges, even furniture). The idea is to build things of easily replacable parts, with standardized interfaces. A computer actually is one of the best examples of modular design - typical modules are psu, processor, mainboard, graphics card, hard drive, optical drive, etc. All are easily interchangeable, as long as you get one that supports the same standard as the one you replaced. I'll go ahead and copy this to the talk page there so some one can use it to improve the article. TERdON 14:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
You can find some more info here and here. (Maybe Modular design should be a redirect?) David Sneek 14:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I think not. Those pages describe modularity in the software world only (or at least that what they should do - according to the title. One of them speaks of as well cognitive science as network biology???). Modular design is a very important concept in manufacturing technology as well. The computer (read: IBM PC compatible) hardware actually is one of the best examples availabe of modular design in manufacturing. Possibly, they could be merged instead, but that really would have to be to a page without a (programming) parenthesis. And the subjects are so big anyway, that there is information enough to support subpages. TERdON 14:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Army worm

Is there another name for the Army worm, or is there no such article in wikipedia ? Wizzy…☎ 15:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

The army worm is the larva of the Pseudaletia unipuncta moth. There doesn't seem to be an article on it though, but it is mentioned in the maize article. --Canley 22:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Wizzy…☎ 09:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] infra red security system

hey guysCAN U HELP ME WITH A THIS PROJECT I NEED 2 DOO i need 2 make a infra red secuty system just 2 show onan exhibition any ideas on how 2 make one or do u guys have any links???--Iamhungry 15:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC) i want one that is quite simple bcause im not a genius--Iamhungry 15:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC) but im not that dumb you know--Iamhungry 15:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

At a guess, I'd start with infrared or electric eye, but I think you'll have better luck using Google to find "electric eye project" or the like. The very quick nutshell is that you'll want an IR-emitting diode coupled with an IR photosensor. Wikipedia will likely not have project-style guidelines. — Lomn Talk 16:06, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Google "electronic kits" and look around. GangofOne 17:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Japan 100 volts 50/60 hertz

Why is one part of Japan wired up for 100 volts 50 hertz and the other part for 100 volts 60 hertz? Pls send answer to (saving your inbox from flooding)

According to [56]:
Eastern Japan 50 Hz (Tokyo, Kawasaki, Sapporo, Yokohoma, and Sendai); Western Japan 60 Hz (Osaka, Kyoto, Nagoya, Hiroshima)

[edit] Cleaning lab glassware

I am following a procedure to get lab glassware very clean (for use in amino acid analysis). One step is to 'wash the glassware with 6N HCl'. My question is what exactly does 'wash' mean in this context? Rinse with the acid? Let the glassware soak in acid? Fill it with the acid and rub it with a brush? (I doubt it) Your opinion, please.... ike9898 17:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure how clean you need it; in our school labs, cleaning with acid generally means filling it with a small quantity of acid and then swilling it. But it sounds like you are probably using stronger acids than the weak bench chemicals used in school, so I'm not sure of the safety of swilling it around. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 22:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
6M HCl isn't that strong, really. In any case, if it just says wash, you're probably only expected to rinse the entire surface with the acid. If you were supposed to soak it, it would say soak. If there's anything on the glass that needs soaking or scrubbing to come off, you probably didn't perform the earlier steps properly. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 00:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that 6 M HCl can burn you badly. Isn't a saturated soln of HCl 11.8 M? ike9898 02:01, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
  • To acid wash for protein work, leave the glassware filled with the acid in a switched on fumehood overnight. Some labs also heat the solution to 70 degrees, but depending on where you are you might need to get occupational health and safety to OK the proceedure. Always use heavy duty gloves, not regular latex or nitrile. Isn't there someone who you can ask about normal lab proceedure?--nixie 03:29, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Um, well. I'm supposed to be that person. ike9898 20:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Geography. ebb

Is it correct? If ebb in a sea was happen the opposite side of earth is ebb so.? If correct why?

It sounds like you're asking about why high and low tides appear in pairs. Have you read the article on tides? — Lomn Talk 18:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
You might also be interested in tidal force; the physics behind this. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 18:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tsiolkovsky, Konstantin

Do you know HOW he communicated with others, considering his impairment (verbally, sign language, etc)?

He was hard of hearing, not completely deaf. --Kainaw (talk) 20:48, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What keeps clouds up

What forces of physics in the atmosphere keep the water/ice particles together to form a cloud and what keeps the cloud above the surface suspended in the atmosphere? Is the process different on the "night side" of the planet? Does it differ in relatively cold area of the earth vs for instance at the equator Thanks!

All the Best,

Greg

The article Cloud has answers to that. Please read the instructions at the top of this page. Black Carrot 18:27, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Microsoft Operating Environments

I need to know if an operating evnironment is the same thing as a GUI? If not, was Microsoft the first to create a "True Operating Environment" --208.189.210.6 19:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

An operating environment is, as the name implies, an environment from which you may operate the computer. GUI is an acronym for Graphical User Interface. An operating environment may contain GUI items, but it is not a requirement for it to do so. Microsoft was not the first to create either one. --Kainaw (talk) 20:46, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Is there any essential technology (meaning not a different version of something someone else invented) that Microsoft invented? DirkvdM 10:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Essential? No. Every time Microsoft has a new essential item, it existed before in another form - just not as popular as when Microsoft did it. There are only two things that I've heard Microsoft devotees argue about: the registry and COMM. A common registry is sort of a unique invention. I wouldn't call it essential though. As for COMM, long before it existed Amiga did the same thing with ARexx (a type of Rexx) that let programs talk to one another easily. --Kainaw (talk) 19:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What does aetiology mean?

See Etiology. --Sum0 20:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cellphone recharging

I heard a rumour a while ago (maybe 6 months or so), but might have misunderstood the article or something...is it possible to recharge cellphones via a satellite signal? What is this technology called? Thanks for your help! --HappyCamper 22:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure it's impossible to send enough energy through a radio signal to recharge a phone. In terms of interesting recharge methods, Motorola introduced a solar recharger for satellite phones a year ago, and there is the inductive power transfer method which involves placing the item on a kind of mouse mat which charges it. --Canley 22:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I wrote a research paper on this in college a while back. Here is the issue: There is enough power in a standard radio signal to power a speaker without any extra energy source. Radio Shack used to sell kits to make these radios (I think they only tuned to AM stations). I believe they called them crystal diode radios.
I used just the antenna/tuner part of them to get a good signal and placed them close to each other to see if any one would have a reduction in power (voltage or amperage) because they were in close proximity to another one. No. They do not. With 20 of them sitting side by side, they all maintained the same power.
Next, I put them in series so each one would theoretically add to the power of the next one. This failed. Once connected to each other, they did interfere with one another. So, I put diodes between them to force a single direction of electricity, but I didn't have small enough diodes for such low power.
My conclusion: If you had a few thousand of these antennas and extremely small diodes to keep them from interfering with one another, you could get enough power to trickle charge a battery. I do not have a cell phone, pager, or laptop. So, I haven't worried about trying to do it. --Kainaw (talk) 01:56, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Also note that Tesla wanted to broadcast power, as opposed to just a signal. It is possible to broadcast large amounts of power, but would be very dangerous and the ability of anyone to tap into the power for free would also make it impracticle. That said, if the power needs for a cellphone can be reduced to an extremely low level, they may not be so worried about the danger and costs, which would be greatly reduced to match. StuRat 09:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Genome Project

Hello! If the human genome was 99% mapped to 99.99% accuracy back in 2000, why do we still have nothing remotely close to a cure for purely genetic diseases? As I see it, there is still no idea where most genetic diseases come from, let alone a cure. What was accomplished and announced with great fanfare back in 2000, if we have not seen any significant benefits 6 years later? I thought that having a complete understanding of DNA would enable us to totally eliminate thousands of diseases, from Down Syndrome to oily skin. What am I missing? Thanks. ironcito 22:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

They only got the map, not the directions. Complete understanding of all the processes involved in a complex multicellular organism (such as ourselves) is probably centuries away. Tzarius 22:46, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Exactly. Knowing where a gene sequence is and even what it does doesn't mean we know how it works or how to stop it doing something harmful. The HGP database will be immensely helpful to science, but medical science works very slowly, and developing drugs takes many years of research and testing. --Canley 22:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
On the bright side, your DNA makes for a nifty poster, and those are 100% complete. Black Carrot 23:32, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The human genome project made sense as a "big science" project because many small research labs were using inefficient methods to slowly identify all human genes. One of the "results" of genome projects has been technical. It is now much less expensive to sequence genomes. It is now a goal to be able to determine an all of individual's gene sequences for "$1,000 or less" (PMID 15719589). Predisposition for many human genetic diseases that are already understood could then be diagnosed independent of waiting to see the disease phenotype. This would allow for prevention of disease either by pre-natal screening or behavior modification. Many genetic influences on disease are complex, involving many genes. Now that the human genome sequence is in hand, there are many research studies attempting to better understand complex genetic disease processes. Ultimately, the human genome project has saved money and speeded up the process of studying genes and how genes influence health. There is still much work to be done. --JWSchmidt 23:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
  • It might also bear mentioning that the Genome Project did not map all human DNA: its stated goal was to map all human genes. It mapped 99% of euchromatic DNA but did not map heterochromatic DNA. If "junk DNA" has any relation to disease - and we just don't know if it does - the Human Genome project won't help with it. - Nunh-huh 01:17, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Knowing a genome sequence doesn't make it any easier to develop new drugs or treatments, a few examples

  • Gene therapy for single disorders like Cystic Fibrosis- requires a good gene therapy technique, gene therapy is in development but is still in early stages
  • For multigene genetic disorders like diabetes, scientists are still trying to find out which genes are involved, the sequence should speed up the process. But then they have to work out how the genes involved interact and which ones would be useful for therapy
  • Say there is a enzyme which makes skin oily, and we have identified it in the genome, to make a drug to modify the activity of that enzyme (this is a very simple example). First we need to characterise the proteins crystal structure, then we need to design molecules to inhibit the enzyme, then we need to do a variety of tests both on the drugs effectiveness and clinical trials - that's why the average time it takes to develop a successful drug is about 15 years plus.

So its really too soon to be seeing alot of clinical benefits from the completion of the human genome project, but I'm sure there will be more tangible benefits in 15 - 20 years.--nixie 01:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Special Attack

I don't know if anyone here has seen 'Space cadets' but in episode we see a ex-KGB trainer attempt a move on a cadet. he seems to grab the back of the neck towards the outside end, here he applies pressure and is able to bring the cadet down in a complete nervous bodily loss of control. Is this possible? Are there any articles on it I have no idea what it is called or relates to? How does this work? And how would one attampt to recreate it?

Moreover are similair moves seen in 'Xena' also possible with her attack on the neck which achieves a similair result? (7121989 22:38, 12 January 2006 (UTC))

With enough time and/or strength, you probably could do a Vulcan nerve pinch, but I don't know if it's actually doable in a combat situation. Tzarius 22:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think that actually exists. In fact, I've heard it didn't really exist in the series either, but the article disagrees with me. What exactly is the 'outside end' of a neck? Black Carrot 22:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
The 'Outside neck' is purely a fabrication by me but here is my anatomical definition presented by my diagram:

Image:Dfdfdf.JPG (7121989 23:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC))

Nice. Well, if he's strong enough, he might be snapping the guy's neck. That's the only non-fictional thing I can think of. Black Carrot 23:29, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
This is likely based on the ability to knock most people out by sudden pressure on the neck in just the right place. If the brain receives a sudden surge of blood, it will tell the heart to stop beating (or slow beating) for a moment. With a perfect blow, you can create a sudden surge of blood, which causes the heart to pause a second, which then causes no blood to go to the brain. Then, the person passes out. In practice, this rarely works. You just end up causing extreme damage to different parts of the neck. --Kainaw (talk) 01:49, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
This will better work if you give pressure in front, near the aorta the tendon that mesures the bloodpressure to your brain (can't remember the name of it). You can try this on your self, if you get the right point it immediately affects the bloodpressure (And may cause serious damage to your brain) and you may see nothing for some seconds. My Wing Chun teacher once demonstrated me that. helohe (talk) 17:58, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, don't forget that Space Cadets is entirely made up. Night Gyr 09:09, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What stops me passing through a wall?

On a minute scale from atoms and up to, sub-atomic particles, quarks and strings what stops a mass of particles pass through another solid? Cos all these particles are essentially energy so something as intangible as energy defines physicality, whats that about? I have though heard of cases where particles are able to transit through each other in quantum physics but the chances are minute of a suitable scenrio fit for such an event to ever occur. (7121989 22:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC))

When you walk into a wall, the normal force that pushes you back is ultimately due to electromagnetic repulsion. Also, note that to go through a wall implies that you need to break apart the wall; a large amount of energy would be required to break apart the strong bond between the particles of the wall. enochlau (talk) 23:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Well I'm no physicist, but I think it's because of the electromagnetic force acting on atoms and molecules - so rather than your particles physically bumping into the wall particles, the electromagnetic repulsion stops your body's atoms from getting any closer to any wall atoms, stopping you. This force applies to everything, so when you think you're standing on the floor, the electromagnetic force means you're actually hovering above it at a minute altitude. I'm not sure if that all makes sense, so anyone else is free to correct me. --Sum0 23:16, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, you're 'hovering' above the ground in the same way that your body is roughly 100% 'empty space'. Solid is as solid does. The forces that make up molecules are what solidness is, and what volume is. Black Carrot 23:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Take two magnets. Move them close together so that they repel each other but do not touch. Photons are the particles that do that and that keep you from going through walls. Each electron is a little magnet. WAS 4.250 04:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

If I only had a brain.

[edit] what is a tsunamis retreat and rise cycle

See tsunami. --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 00:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] phpbb icons

I am an admin at a forum. Would someone please tell me how to change the generic phpbb icon on top left hand corner? --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 00:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

The easy way... Replace the icon image file on your server with a different image using the same filename. --Kainaw (talk) 01:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Liquid Soap Question

Hello, I have a question about liquid soap that has been driving my family crazy! My liquid soap dispenser rests on my sink ledge in both of my bathrooms. However, in one of my bathrooms (the larger of the two) the soap becomes very watery, loosing almost all soap consistancy. It can still lather, yet its like pumping water out of the dispenser. We had some theory about people watering down our soap for some reason, but that is very unlikely. When we fill up the dispenser, the soap is always of regular thickness. After a few days is when it starts to go liquidy. I've recently put tin foil around the dispenser and the problem hasn't occured in a while. The soap brand is Dial. I'd appreciate any insight into this strange phenomenon of soap. M@$+@ Ju 23:18, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

By chance, is the bathroom with the watery soap the same one everyone showers in? Steam is very good at getting into every opening it can find (including the soap dispenser). Then, it becomes water again. --Kainaw (talk) 01:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
That is a definite possibility. The bathroom does get quite steamy after a shower. I never associated it with the shower because the other bathroom gets steamy as well. I think that you might be right though. Thanks for the info, but one more question. Does the soap loose its cleaning qualities in that state? M@$+@ Ju 21:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
It will keep its cleaning qualities. The snappy answer for you is that soap is designed to be mixed with water, so of course it will work when mixed with water. The technical answer is that soap works by isolating non-polar particles in a little sphere of soap particles. The soap particles are nonpolar on one side and polar on the other, allowing the resulting sphere to dissolve in water where the non-polar particle of dirt or whatever would not have. There's a name for all this that currently escapes me. Having the soap pre-dissolved in the water won't change the process. Isomorphic 02:17, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
That makes sense. Thanks alot for your guys' help. M@$+@ Ju 17:38, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What are two things that are not considered matter?

Could antimatter be one? Dismas|(talk) 01:17, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
First, Do your own homework. Second, your teacher may be defining energy as something other than matter. Other teachers claim it is matter in another form (like ice and water being the same thing in a different form). Your notes should tell you what your teacher wants. --Kainaw (talk) 01:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Nouns and verbs? Tzarius 04:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd say antimatter is actually matter. And Kainaw is right, energy could be considered matter, too. Most nouns refer to material things, and verbs refer to their interactions. To be on the safe side, I'd say space-time and information. --James S. 09:40, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

What about things that don't matter? :) DirkvdM 10:33, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
See abstraction. There are loads of abstract things that are not matter. For example, music, color, knowledge, fashion, philosophy.... --Shantavira 12:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Two such things are money (when it's not cash) and software. – b_jonas 13:14, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, money is interresting. Essentially it is something immaterial, but it can also be something physical, in the form of a coin or bank note. It's basically information, as is software. But when you put software on a cd you don't say that that is software, merely that it holds it. But when you put money on a piece of paper you call that money too. Is this just words or is there a deeper distinction? (Maybe people would deal with money better if they realised this, but that's another sidetrack.) DirkvdM 07:32, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
The newest book of Mérő László, Az élő pénz, discusses the nature of money. He tries to prove that money is a self-replicating thing. – b_jonas 16:45, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 13

[edit] Excel

Dear fellow users:

I am wondering if anyone knows how to eliminate the cells in excel which appears when you copy and paste your items onto another program like Microsoft word. I am not very computer technical so if anyone knows, can they please help me. Thank you.

Thank you, Geim

129.97.252.58 00:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

If you use Microsoft Word, select "Paste Special" from the menu and then select "Unformatted Text" or "Unformatted Unicode Text". That's it. Or you can paste the selected contents to the Notepad. It will be converted to tab separated plain text. You then copy from Notepad and paste to Word. Have a nice weekend. -- Toytoy 02:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Baryons

There are some baryons missing from the list of baryons. What are they? I now that there's one called Phi (φ). There's a link but my computer can't access the information. Thanks 216.209.153.88 00:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC) Max

The phi particle is not a baryon, but a meson. See list of mesons. —Keenan Pepper 04:24, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Star Wars in 3D?

From Star Wars:

At a ShoWest convention in 2005, George Lucas demonstrated new technology and stated that he is planning to release all six films in a new 3-D film format, beginning with A New Hope in 2007.

How do they do it? How do they convert an aready been made movie? If they could do that with A New Hope, could they do it with Gone With the Wind? -- Toytoy 02:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, he could just re-render the prequels since they were 90% CGI anyway. As for the older 3, he might have a team go over the key frames and put in estimated depth information, then have the other frames interpolated by machine. Or so I speculate, anyway. Tzarius 04:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
The Prequels are of much less problem. I bet George Lucas might have taken some principal photography in 3-D already. I want to know if they bother to go some extra miles with the better and more entertaining older movies. If I have unlimited power and resources, I can order people to digitize original bluescreen footages and redo composition from scratch. I can even selectively rebuild some bluescreen elements with 3-D tools (e.g. a closeup shot of the Star Destroyer). Maybe I can even rebuild the set in 3-D. So I can erase the background, and put Luke Skywalker (morphed to create depth cues) and his lovely dad (also morphed) in a virtual Death Star chamber. Maybe they can recreate Carey Fisher, Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford in 3-D as long as they pay top dollars to the actors. Anyway, they can always recreate Darth Vader, Storm Troopers and most robots and space monsters digitally.
I don't think anyone can do the same job easily with Gone With the Wind. The 1939 movie simply does not contain adjustable bluescreen elements.
If I want to do it cheaply, I'll just hire some keyframers and let them do all the lousy morph jobs with cheap computers. -- Toytoy 06:04, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wisconsin Weather

Why does Wisconsin get so many cloudy days in January?

During the winter months, cold moist air from the Great Lakes, the Upper Mississippi River Valley, and Canada blows in as cold fronts into warm daytime-heated high pressure zones, accelerating cloud forming and the chance of precipitation.
Why don't you move to New Mexico? Nrcprm2026 09:35, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Or is it all the gloomy scandnavians? Dalembert 11:05, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] science

The new substance produced in a chemical reaction have the same properties as te original substance?

Well, the products have some of the same properties as the reactants, for example mass, but no, in general the properties will be different. —Keenan Pepper 04:29, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alien Lifeforms

What do you think the odds are of Aliens. I mean, the odds have to be really high considering, you need a Rocky planet, the right distance from it's sun, enough water, enough gravity, and enough life sustaining gases.

See the Wikipedia article on the Drake equation and related articles such as Rare Earth hypothesis. --JWSchmidt 04:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Depends very much on how you define life. We've only got one planetary environment as an example and even here we keep on discovering things that don't fit in with what we previously didn't think possible. So what could 'life' be like in a completely different environment. Which gases were you thinking of, for example? Oxygen? Well, there are also anaerobic organisms. Right here on Earth. Sunlight? There are ecosystems that get their energy from the Earth at the bottom of the oceans, where there is no sunlight. Just two exmples.
There's life, Jim, but not as we know it. DirkvdM 10:41, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
The short answer is "nobody really knows, and anybody that gives you a confident answer is talking out their backside". --Robert Merkel 14:17, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Given the enormous size of the universe it makes no sence that we will ever see or hear them although there are probably millions of alian species not knowing from one another.(zh)

[edit] exiting earth's atmosphere

my friends and i were having a discusion on wheather or not a United States milatary fighter jet has the structural intergrety and power (propulsion) to make it to outer space. Now we do understand that a fighter yet is not desinged for exiting the earth's atmosphere. let's pertend that we have to put that jet in space. what does it take. i believe a fighter jet does have the structural intergrety to make it and it does have the propulsion as welll. now i believe that because of the lack of oxygen in outer space, the yet would not make it. now i believe (i may be wrong) that if we attached some type of oxygen tanks to the jet so it can be used to burn the fuel, the jet then could make it to outer space. Main question is can the jet itself without any extra addings to the structure of the jet, can it make it then ( remember we are able to only add some type of gas tank to help burn the fuel). the other question is does the earth's atmophere cause the jet to burn on the way out to space.

Take a look at jet engine. A jet engine can't function in space regardless of whether you have oxygen available to burn fuel. The reason is that a jet works by sucking in air, accelerating it, and pushing it out the other direction at a much higher speed. This won't work in space (or in the really high areas of the upper atmosphere) because there isn't enough air to suck in. I believe that scramjets are expected to work higher up in the stratosphere than ordinary jets, but they're still experimental, and no military aircraft are fitted with them. So the short version is no, your jet wouldn't make it to space. Isomorphic 06:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
That's quite right. However, replacing the jets with rockets of similar size wouldn't be sufficient either.
You must understand that there is a distinction between getting into space and getting into orbit. Getting into space means only that you must reach an altitude higher than essentially all of the atmosphere. [I say "essentially all" because there is no sharp boundary. An arbitrary altitude such as 50 miles (80.5 km) or 100 km (62.1 miles) is sometimes used as defining the boundary of space: see the first link.] Getting into orbit, on the other hand, requires enough speed that you won't fall back to the ground -- your vehicle will keep circling the Earth -- and for this the minimum speed is about 18,000 mph. (At a still higher speed of about 25,000 mph, it is possible to get away from the Earth altogether and not go into orbit.)
Okay now, 18,000 mph is far beyond anything achievable by a jet airplane. To take a fighter into orbit you would have to modify it so much it would be a totally different vehicle. If that's what you meant, the answer is certainly no.
However, if you really just meant getting into space (after which the plane would drop back into the atmosphere), then the answer is still no, but you might get to a yes by stretching a point.
Looking at various web sites, it appears that the "ceiling" (the highest altitude they can reach in normal use) for of typical fighters is around 50,000 to 55,000 feet, and that's only about 10 miles. To reach 5 times the altitude would require changes so large that again you would be talking about a completely different vehicle. On the other hand, reaching space (not orbit) by an airplane specially designed for the purpose (not a modified fighter), that's been done. The plane was the X-15 and it flew in the 1960s. It was rocket-powered and, to preserve its fuel supply, was dropped from another plane rather than taking off from the ground.
--Anonymous, 06:35 UTC, January 13, 2006
One extra point: Airplanes use wings for lift. Outside the atmosphere, there is no air to create lift. So, the redesign would have to involve turing the airplane into a rocket in mid-flight. --Kainaw (talk) 19:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Why do you ask about US military fighters? That is very specific. Did you have something specific in mind? There have, bowever, been attempts at rebuilding an existing Lear jet to get into space. Another thing you might want to look at is SpaceShipOne. DirkvdM 10:46, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Urgent DVD writer agonies

I'm using a LiteOn DVD-writer; for the last year, it's been perfect. I reinstalled Windows XP last week, and now I'm on the edge of tears because of a major problem: I can't get it to write to the only DVD+Rs I have. I paid for hundreds of these discs, because they've always worked fine with my burner. It writes to DVD+RWs from Nero, but it won't burn to DVD+R. I need it to write these images, but it just won't... it's driving me crazy. I get power calibration errors writing to DVD+R.

Quoting http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/269363:
"A power calibration error is caused by the inability of a DVD-RW drive to use a DVD-R or DVD-RW disk.
DVD-R and DVD-RW disks themselves have information written on them, within this Media ID code there is information that the drive uses to calibrate itself to the disk, when a drive first starts to write to a disk it will burn a small amount of data to a calibration area on the disc, using the calibration information in the Media ID code, and then try to read back the data that it has written. If it cannot be read, then disk will be ejected and fail with a power calibration error.
A power calibration error is normally caused by problems with the media. Should you be experiencing problems with your drive or the media, we recommend that a disk from a good quality manufacturer be used to test it."
So I guess it's a problem with the discs itself. Sorry, but you might just have spent hundreds on dodgy media. enochlau (talk) 08:57, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't give up yet. Run Windows Update and install everything that looks like it might be a drive patch and try again. Then if it doesn't work you can give up. —James S. 09:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Or switch to Linux? DirkvdM 10:49, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, reading that forum post I quoted above, it doesn't seem like software is the cause. enochlau (talk) 12:37, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah! I just got my Linux machine to write standard Rockridge data disks, on my standard (cheap) dvd writer, using cheap Costco disks. But I absolutely cannot write a standard dvd that my dvd player can read. I use a direct network connection to the big screen now. --Zeizmic 13:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] spinning jenny

hey guys i have a hobby a making any machine that catches my eye then i saw a machine called the spinning jenny i wanted to make a working model of it when igoogled it all i found was about its inventor and even the pictures are from only one angle so can u guys use ur pschic powress and help me by giving me a link or an explanation of its working and how to make it. even the picture that u guys have in ur article of the jenny is different from those in other sites --212.72.18.51 08:57, 13 January 2006 (UTC

I think a "spinning jenny" is a generic name for a compact spinning wheel, of which there are many kinds and variations. Try making a simple spinning wheel first before attempting to woodwork the more intricate compact versions.
Correction: a spinning jenny is apparently multi-spooled with horizontal wheels. That will teach me to try to answer WP:RD questions without RTFA first. I see what you mean about almost all the photos on Google being from the same angle, but a few of them are actual photographs from different angles. —James S. 09:22, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I see your problem. There's nothing on HowStuffWorks, either. I searched Google for -how to make a spinning jenny- and -spinning jenny diagrams-, and the best result I got was this: http://www.austehc.unimelb.edu.au/tia/269_image.html#7 Good luck. Have you tried looking for a book on it? --Black Carrot 12:55, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
A few months back I went to a sheep and wool festival which was basically a big gathering of people at the local fairgrounds who brought their sheep to show off as well as maybe sell some wool that they had made into yarn. At the show there were a number of people selling spinning wheels/jennys. So, what I would suggest is trying to find people who sell hand spun wool, then asking them where to get diagrams and such. There are also message boards on the net for those who are interested in raising livestock. You could ask on one of those. Dismas|(talk) 00:43, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
You wouldn't have much luck. As one of those aforementioned wool festival people, I have to say that I don't know anyone that makes spinning jennies or sells plans for one. A spinning jenny is an industrial machine that lead to the end of hand-spun yarn and so is rather the opposite of the ideal of those using spinning wheels. (Of course there are those electric spinning wheels...) Basically the spinning jenny is just a massively multiple spinning wheel. Rmhermen 02:06, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] neurological question

Hello, I would like to know which chemicals (neuro-chemicals) are released from the skin, or the tissue under the skin, when a person is massaged. I know that massage is good for the immune system and other things however I would like to know what happens, chemically, preferably also the route this takes. Hope I have explained it sufficiently - I cannot find anything on the subject! best wishes Anneloes

It's not just under the skin; what a [good] massage does (or so some calim), is to activate the lymphatic system, facilitating its circulation. Mariano(t/c) 13:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Neurotransmitter is a good start. Many pleasurable things act on either the chemicals or receptors. --Zeizmic 13:58, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

thanks - which ones are activated by the touch itself - whats at the beginning of the whole sequence? Anneloes

[edit] Formation of the Patella

Hello! I think I read somewhere that the 'Patella' or bones of the knee joint fuse and take proper form not at birth, but later on, as the human body develops. Is this true? I cannot seem to find this information anywhere at present. Thank you for taking time to answer this question.

Kamalini Mazumder

Hi Kamalini. I found this text -- while it's not specific to the knee joint, it does talk to the issue you're interested in:
The skeleton of a newborn baby is made up of more than 300 parts, most of which are made of cartilage. Over time, most of this cartilage turns into bone, in a process called ossification. As the baby grows, some of its bones fuse together to form bigger bones. By adulthood, your skeleton contains just 206 bones.
--Quasipalm 20:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

The patella is cartilaginous in early infancy. The first appearance of bone occurs at 32 to 76 months in boys, and 20 to 40 months in girls. The bones of the knee change size and shape enough throughout childhood that an x-ray of the knee can be used to assess bone age. alteripse 23:48, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Windows NT Workstation 4.0 Inbound Network Connections Limit, and Existence of Any Such Limit in 2000 and XP

Windows NT Workstation 4.0 was limited to 10 inbound network connections, something about lack of client-access licences. How did this work? How was a connection marked as inbound or outbound? Was the connection per program, per port, or something else? Could this be changed in the Registry? Do any such limits exist in Windows 2000 or XP? Thanks.

MSTCrow 13:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
This is probably too specialized for this forum. I know from my own personal nightmares that Windows networking carries a lot of baggage from the early days. They were competing with Novell at the time, so there is the issue of a sever/client list being constructed and replicated on each individual machine. This became a big mess with many servers, so Win NT may have limited things. Bottom line is that we can't help you. --Zeizmic 17:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] search engines

What is "offline searching" ? searching offline!!!--212.72.15.118 14:40, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

This is a good question that passes the preamble test. The term is probably marketing buzz. Computer searching used to be always 'offline' because nobody was on the Internet (long time ago!). Think of the 'Find' command in Windows. Then came the big Internet search engines (Google was not the first!), with all sorts of different algorithms to improve the search process. Now, these algorithms are being applied to either files on your PC, or inside a corporation. Our company just started with a new one with mixed success, since it is difficult to use the Google method of link-rating on this internal cruft. --Zeizmic 16:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
It may mean "searching your PC" (as Google Desktop Search does) or "searching your intranet" (as a Google search appliance does). But as Zeizmic says, it's likely a marketing term that hasn't achieved enough currency to mean a specific thing, if anything. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:06, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] how can i lose weight

i am 106 Kg but my weight is 172 cm,,, and i am over wieght and i love eating what can i do to lose weight and not stop eating? there is only one word for the answer[www.enwikipedia.org/excercise and the magical word is]--212.72.15.118 14:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

You have two options:
  1. Increase the amount of calories you burn (exercise).
  2. Decrease the amoung ot calories you eat (diet).
--Quasipalm 19:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
As to strategies to help you achieve those things, there are well-known services that provide calorie-controlled food (such as Weight Watchers and Jenny Craig; anecdotally, I've heard that those services tend to help you lose weight but people tend to put much of it back on again); there are also certain drugs available on prescription from your doctor that can help control your appetite in various ways. For exercise, if you can afford it you might consult a personal trainer or sign up for aerobics classes if you find exercising by yourself unsatisfactory. But there's no magic solution. If there was, I'd be considerably lighter than I presently am. --Robert Merkel 00:17, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Just Eat better and Exercise dude, i lost 116 lbs in 5 months.

If you're really desperate, you could try hormone treatment, but it's not a large problem it seems yet unless it escalates further, but you should just see your doctor if you're worried about anything. If it's just genes and metabolism, your doctor would probably be able to aid you in something (ie. give you mild stimulants). Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 04:20, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
You say you love eating. Do you like food or do you like stuffing your face? Maybe a change from junkfood to tasty food could help. Alternatively, start smoking. :) DirkvdM 07:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I second that. Smoking less than 10 cigarettes a day helped me to lose a lot of weight. Granted, now I smoke, but I look better. I think it can be safely argued that the net change in my lifestyle as a result of smoking has led to increased health. And quitting smoking is a lot easier for me than losing weight any other way. On a side note, diet can definitely help you lose weight; but if your goal is also to look good, then you will need to exercise. I only dieted, which led to me looking great fully-clothed, but less than super whilst nude. Any way of changing your weight is going to have a profound impact on your lifestyle, so I urge you to examine your motives before you begin any one path. The worst thing that can happen is not just that you won't lose weight, but that failing to do so will cause you to give up trying. It's important to stay realistic with yourself. Bethefawn 04:47, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Smoking, along with smoking crack and bulimia, is generally a bad strategy to lose weight. Try to exercise more and eat less -- it's suprisingly simple. --Quasipalm 00:20, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Not less - better. Fast food is generally unhealthy, whereas things you find in cookbooks (other than cookbooks devoted to desserts) are generally better for you. And pay attention to the food pyramid. Black Carrot 16:31, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] comp problem

i keep on getting this error "about some weird thing called "kernel 32"any hints on what it is and how i can remove or treat it--212.72.15.118 14:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

The thing about error messages is that they might look like rubbish, but they often contains details that matter. Also, there are so many possible messages that just picking one word could be about anything. There is a very important file in windows with Kernel32 in the name. I recommend you post the exact error message, word for word, and details of what you are doing when it happens. Notinasnaid 16:30, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
And mentioning the OS would also help. DirkvdM 07:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

i use windows 98 it happens when i switch on my comp any program that i open is closed due 2 it

[edit] Size

How to increase the size of penis

take a a bowl filled with spaghetti and pour some sauce(soy preffered).add some valium and swirl a drink in a gulp for better results take one gran of the metal penisenlargium--212.72.15.118 15:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
More seriously, see penis enlargement. There are many methods; in general, they:
  • don't work, or
  • do work, but have serious side effects, or
  • don't work and have serious side effects
Then there's the MAKE PENIS FAST!!! method. . . :) Mirv 16:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Simple fact of life... If there was a method of penis enlargment that worked without serious side effects, nobody would be asking about penis enlargment. --Kainaw (talk) 01:20, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Watch some hard-core porn, that should increase the size dramatically in just seconds. StuRat 06:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Human Genome Project

Following the question asked yesterday I started thinking. Their stated goal in the Human genome project was to map the genes in a human body. So whose genes did they map? Presumably they mapped the genes from one individual as if they had used genes from more than one individual they may have missed some (say a gene that is present in Chinese but not Causasians, etc). So does anyone know? AllanHainey 16:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Someone asked Celera bigwig Craig Venter who they were, and I believe he said there were seven or eight people used, with a range of "races". He confirmed that one of the "caucasians" was himself. I believe the HGP did much the same thing. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:37, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
  • You might be interested in this FAQ from one of the National Labs invoved in the US govt effort. Basically, the explanation they give is that they took samples from a large number of people, then mixed a few of them together, so that no one who donated a sample can be sure if any of there genetic material was used or not. That source also confirms that Venter's DNA was among that used in the private effort. This source provides a similar, but slightly different answer. You might also want to keep in mind that this project is never "done" in the sense that additional sequencing of additional people continues. The additional sequencing helps identify variations, links between variations and diseases, etc. Johntex\talk 03:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Microsoft XP Controversies

Did microsoft lose sales of windows XP due to the activation thing and will it be included in Windows Vista? Additionally, will just having an AMD Athlon 64-bit processor will be enough to be able to get the Windows Vista 64-bit version? Finally, how well does WOW64 work (for those who have the preview edition or Windows XP x64)? Ilyanep (Talk) 17:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

This is politics, not science. Read the thing at the beginning. Sorry. --Zeizmic 20:58, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, sorry. I was thinking Computer Science (because of the latter part of the question). Ilyanep 23:35, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
For the second question, the 64-bit versions of Windows will run on an Athlon 64 so long as you have adequate memory and disk space, and compatible hardware. By compatible hardware I mean a normal PC, not something with an incompatible BIOS or video card, for example.
I understand the current 64-bit XP doesn't run existing 32-bit Windows software at all well, but I don't know to what extent this problem may have been overcome in 64-bit Vista. This is just my impression, I have never actually run 64-bit Windows.-gadfium 02:37, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pendulum

Can any body refer me to links/resources that explain how pendulum is used in alternative medicine. I want to know how pendulum can be used to diagnose and treat a disease. I know there is an article about pendulum in Wikipedia but it does not tell what i want to know. Thanks a lot

Have you also read the article on alternative medicine? And personally, I'd suggest pseudoscience. Dismas|(talk) 00:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I seem to recall an old wives tale about using a pendulum to determine the gender of an unborn baby. StuRat 06:46, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
It's called radiesthesia. --Shantavira 12:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LCD Vs CRT

I use the computer monitor mostly for reading only. I just want to know which monitor is best for using it for reading- CRT? or LCD? All these days I thought LCD was better, but I read in a magazine yesterdaythat CRTs are better and one of the reasons for that is CRTs have less glare. Is it true? Finally, which do you think is the better?

If anything I would've thought that LCDs have less glare since there isn't that piece of glass at the front to reflect light off. I personally find LCDs much sharper when reading text. enochlau (talk) 01:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
With an LCD, you get: Less glare, straighter lines, and more contrast between colors.
With a CRT, you get: Possibility of a brighter image, a wider range of screen resolutions.
The problem with the CRT is that a cheap one will commonly have a curved and blurry image compared to a cheap LCD. However, an expensive CRT will have a picture that is possibly better than an expensive LCD. --Kainaw (talk) 01:18, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
They are both fine, but many people do not know how, do not care, or do not choose to adjust them for optimimum confort when reading. Often, monitors are too bright, and reading black on white for a prolonged period is uncomfortable. In my opinion, this sends people off on many wild goose chases, like seeking to change to white on black, rather than fixing the monitor. Notinasnaid
I've been using yellow on black, amber on black or green on black for possibly over a decade. As to my browser, I also filter unwanted layout tags such as FONT and STYLE. My system always looks like a beefed-up text-mode DOS machine. I actually like it. It keeps me concentrate on contents rather than decorations. -- Toytoy 01:29, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Internet through satellite phone

Some companies offer 2.4 kbps and 10 kbps Internet access via satellite phones which can be connected to a PC for browsing. How much does a 2.4 kbps unlimited and 10 kbps unlimited Internet plan cost per month? I was not able to find this in Iridium's website.

I don't think they sell the service directly themselves. http://www.satphonestore.com/servprod/iridium/ sells phones and service packages. Their price for 1000 prepaid minutes (note that's not minutes-per-month, that's use-once and gone forever minutes) is $990.00 USD. So a full month's worth of continual connectivity would, at that rate, come in at over $42,000 USD. Cheap, huh? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 23:12, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm fairly certain that if you email or call Iridium, they could give you plenty of information about their pricing structures. Dismas|(talk) 23:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] McDonalds accounting sales figures

How does McDonalds do accounting? If I eat a burger which costs $2, will $2 add up in the sales figures of McDonalds or will only royalty got by McDonalds from store franchisee add to McDonald's sales figures?

If royalty is 10% of sales and cost of burger $2, then, will $2 or $0.2 add to its sales?

In this case "sales figures" can mean two things: a figure used for publicity (pertaining to the whole McDonalds "family") and a strict incomine figure, reported in a government filing. The former is an informal thing, something they might put into a press release; how they calculate this is up to them. The latter is an actual reflection of the real income received by the parent McDonald's company, and is calculated according to strict accounting rules set out by the government (and sometimes the market). In this case the turnover of the franchisees won't be reported. So you might read "in 2004 McDonalds restaurants sold 500 million burgers for 1.2 Billion US dollars, and McDonalds corporation reported turnover of 211 million dollars". -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
If you look at McDonald's last quarterly report, you'll see that McDonald's reports to the government only the money the corporation gets from its franchisees, plus all the revenue from company-owned stores. So in the case above, McDonald's would report 20 cents in revenue, unless the burger came from a company-owned location. -- Mwalcoff 03:56, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Endorphins

I know that working out at night can keep you up late at night due to the Endorphins keeping you up. I was just wondering, how long do the endorphins effect your body for to keep you awake?

I don't have a good source on this, but I remember that endorphins clear in a matter of minutes; the half-time is probably 5 or 10 minutes. However, everything in metabolism is interrelated, so your wakefulness has a lot to do with blood sugar, the amount of protien versus carbohydrates in your gut, how much sleep you've been getting, how much caffiene, alchohol, and other drugs you've had, etc. But from experience, if you break a sweat every half hour, it helps to stay up until a critical point when working out just makes you more tired. --James S. 07:23, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 14

[edit] Firefox tabs problem

I use Windows XP (sorry :)), and I seem to have an annoying problem when opening new tabs in Firefox. Sometimes, when I open a new tab, the whole Firefox window "restores" from its maximised state to that "restored" state where you can drag the window around. I then have to maximise it again. This doesn't happen very often, but it usually happens when I open a new tab just after Firefox starts up or when an external application opens a webpage in a new tab. Any suggestions on how to fix it? -- Daverocks 01:47, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Not really a Science ref desk question, but anyway, it may be the pages you're opening have Javascript code to resize the window. You can prevent this by going to Tools > Options > Content > Enable Javascript (Advanced) > and untick the "allow window resize option". Tzarius 06:10, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
You'd think that (and I do know some pages which have JavaScript that resizes), but the problem occurs even when I press Ctrl+T to open a new tab consisting of a blank page. I don't think there's any JavaScript code on a blank page. :P
Also, I have seen many computing-related questions on the Science ref desk. It even says on WP:RD that the Science ref desk is "To ask questions about science, medicine, computing, and technology". -- Daverocks 07:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

--Easy: just use internet explorer. It's safest, fastest, best.

[edit] Stars lifespan

The stars are big balls of gases (helium, I guess). Being so, why does it take billions of years to burn (fusion) all that gas, thus making a star extinct, in stead of burning it all at once, as when we light a fire next to a balloon full of inflamable gas, making it explode? Thanks for any help.--201.28.77.123 01:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Firstly, a typical star is full of hydrogen, not helium. Although it may seem as though your balloon explodes "instantaneously", it just appears so because the volume is so small. A star, being much bigger, takes a longer time to go through its fuel. enochlau (talk) 01:52, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
That's not really an explanation, though. We need to understand why the whole ball of hydrogen doesn't all go into fusion pretty much at once. There has to be a process which prevents this, keeping the star roughly at equilibrium (with only a tiny proportion of its hydrogen being fused at any time). I don't know, so I did some digging around. Our nuclear fusion and stellar nucleosynthesis articles don't really explain this mechanism but Image:Nucleosynthesis in a star.gif says "nuclear burning occurs at the boundaries between zones". Star says "A variety of different nuclear fusion reactions take place inside the cores of stars, depending upon their mass and composition". So I think this means that the heat inside the star isn't enough to cause fusion, and that the pressure due to gravity is needed too. If that's the case, you'd expect a fairly thin hollow spherical shell deep within the star to be the locus of fusion - above that shell the pressure (I dunno if "pressure" is really the exactly right word here, but you get the idea) is too low to cause fusion. Below that layer the material must already have undergone fusion. Thus (if this handwavery conjecture is right) the mechanism that slows fusion to a steady rate is that only so much hydrogen is available at the fusile pressure zone, and that the rate of transport of fresh fuel down to that layer is limited by the viscocity of the plasma. So, if this is correct, you'd expect a young star to be laying down a roughly spherical helium core, with fusion occuring only at the boundary sphere between it and the hydrogen. As far as I can tell, we don't have an article that explains this (and I have to stress this is me thinking out loud, not an answer at all) - we really should have one. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 02:14, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
If you're asking why it doesn't actually catch on fire, that's simple. There's no oxygen. Superm401 | Talk 04:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Gravity causes matter (mostly hydrogen) from space to gather together. Momentum causes stuff to circle each other rather than all go staight away into one big clump. Over time clumps get bigger due to gravity. Eventually some clumps of mater get big enough that the pressure at the center causes fusion. The fusion creates energy that counteracts the gravity. The size of the star is all about the balancing act between the force of gravity and the force of the energy created by the fusion. More matter in the star produced more gravity causing more fusion creating more energy thus balancing the more mass. When the balancing act is disrupted by something the star can colapse or explode. WAS 4.250 04:30, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

To clarify, this energy causes the star to expand (because hot gases vibrate and force each other away). This retards nuclear fusion, as the further apart the atomic nuclei are, the less often these nuclei will strike each other and fuse. StuRat 06:37, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
In other words, there is an incredibly small chance that an atom will hit another one exactly the right way (head on with the right speed) to cause the two to fuse. It's just that there are so damn many that so much energy is produced. But it will take a long time for all atoms to have hit another one just the right way. DirkvdM 08:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1800

Hi, What was the background of quantum mechanics that dates to 1800? and with what equipment could they possibly study it back then? thanx. :) --Cosmic girl 02:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I think you are refering to the particle/wave duality of light. See Double-slit experiment for more information. —Ruud 02:09, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

thank u :) --Cosmic girl 02:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Or see wave-particle duality. StuRat 03:17, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
The very first idea of quantum mechanics was given in a lecture in December 1900 by Max Planck on his idea for explaining the black body radiation law, by quantizing the allowed energies of the oscillators. Of course reality itself has been quantum mechanical since the Creation. GangofOne 16:11, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Claims of Scientific Evidence Against Evolution

In your website, you talked about scientific evidence for evolution.But then, how come I've heard Christians and creationists claim that there are scientific evidences against it? I'm confused! How can there both be evidence for evolution(or any other theory) and against it?

Exactly what are these claimed-to-be evidences against evolution and are they really evidences against it? Can you please make an article about these claims of scientific evidence against evolution?

You would be interested in creation science and intelligent design. Superm401 | Talk 04:18, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Easy, they don't know what they're talking about. There is plenty of evidence for evolution. "Evidence against it" is a stupid and terribly misleading way to put certain gaps on our knowledge, which is entirely alright. Besides, I wouldn't listen to these people: they don't need "scientific evidences" to believe in their God, so they should just keep their mouth shut on this whole "scientific evidence" subject. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 04:19, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

One can find evidence for and against almost anything. For example the Flat Earth Society collected all kinds of peculiar and isolated "facts" they would claim as evidence against a round earth. Likewise if your a priori commitment is against evolution you can find some "evidence" against it. The latest fashionable evidence (now termed irreducible complexity) is a re-tread of William Paley's 19th century observation that the eye is really complicated and he just couldn't imagine any stepwise development of the eye; likewise Michael Behe just can't imagine that various complex molecular systems could have developed in steps. The other major "evidence" cited against evolution is that we don't have fossils of many intermediate forms of animal that would seem to have been in a lineage (we have many but not all). We have many articles on the controversy (see all the articles linked to evolution, creationism, and intelligent design). Despite these pieces of evidence, unless you have a prior faith commitment to the late 19th creationist scenario, the more you learn about biology the more it becomes overwhelmingly obvious that evolution in some form has certainly been occurring for millions of years, that all forms of life on this planet share a genetic ancestry, and that there a zillion pieces of evidence supporting it for every one that someone claims opposes it. alteripse 04:29, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Because they lie to save souls. See Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District. On 20 December 2005, Judge Jones found for the plaintiff and issued Wikisource:Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District et. al. in which he wrote:

"Throughout the trial and in various submissions to the Court, Defendants vigorously argue that the reading of the statement is not “teaching” ID but instead is merely “making students aware of it.” In fact, one consistency among the Dover School Board members’ testimony, which was marked by selective memories and outright lies under oath, as will be discussed in more detail below, is that they did not think they needed to be knowledgeable about ID because it was not being taught to the students. We disagree." (footnote 7 on page 46) - WAS 4.250 04:41, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I can't imagine how X could occur naturally
  • In fact, no one can imagine how X could possibly occur naturally
  • Therefore it is impossible for X to occur naturally
  • Therefore it must have came about by supernatural means
  • Therefore God/Allah exists and have create X
  • X of course is "earthquakes in the 18th century"
  • It is a fact that no one in the 18th century could imagine how X could possibly occur naturally
  • Therefore God/Allah must have existed in the 18th century

Ohanian 10:33, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

To answer you quite plainly, there is no evidence against evolution, it is an undisputed fact of nature. There is still debate over the precise nature of evolution, its historical trajectories, etc. but no one takes seriously the idea that evolution does not occur. Creationist arguments are based on religious beliefs and have no ground in reality. --Tothebarricades 11:58, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Probably the best listing of such things: An Index of Creationist Claims (With a rebuttal for each.)--Fangz 18:55, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Don't listen to the people who say 'there is no evidence against evolution'. There are certainly questions not answered by evolution, and only someone so convinced of their own position that they will not admit of challenges would deny it. But you'll have to do your own web searches here. Incidentally beware of any site that lists 'creationist claims, each with a rebuttal'. The chances are that if there was a claim they couldn't rebut, they probably wouldn't list it on their site. DJ Clayworth 16:00, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
You do however need to be aware that there are (at least) two different questions covered by 'eveidence for evolution'. One is "does evolution occur", the other is "is evolution solely responsible for the current state of life on planet earth". These may well have different answers. DJ Clayworth 16:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
There is no convincing evidence against evolution. There are things that are not well answered by current theory, there really is not evidence against evolution. Broadly speaking, evolutionary theory is able to explain the current state of life. Guettarda 16:38, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Rate of Global Warming

I've heard some scientists say that it is likely that global warming is occurring much more quickly than most scientists had originally thought.They say that many things scientists predict global warming will cause by the year 2050 will actually occur much more earlier, by only ten to fifteen years later.Excatly why and what's the reason they believe this?

This smells like homework, but you should read the preamble to this forum. --Zeizmic 04:20, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Read these. The first one includes:

Today, the alarm bells are being sounded by scientists themselves. In a meeting in Brooklin, Canada, last month, they revealed the following: 2005 was the hottest year in modern times; the impact of climate change was coming faster than expected; satellite photos show there is 20 percent less Arctic ice today than in 1978, a speed of melting unprecedented in history ("the Arctic is a major driver for the earth's weather cycle"); a study shows over half of the northern hemisphere's permafrost would melt by 2050, unleashing billions of tons of methane, a greenhouse gas more potent than carbon dioxide, which would dramatically accelerate global warming; Greenland lost 162 cubic kilometers of ice each year from 2002 to 2005, higher than all previous estimates, contributing to rising sea levels; and so on. WAS 4.250 04:53, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Draw a circuit diagram for a frequency generator unit

  • Do your own homework. But this link might help. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 04:14, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The efficiency of solar cell

That information is available at Solar cell (in fact in several different places in that article...). —Keenan Pepper 06:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
The current technology is extremely inefficient. Passive solar energy, like heating a house via windows, is far more efficient. StuRat 06:11, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that's an example of how our attitude towards our surroundings has changed. People used to look at the lie of the land and build their houses accordingly (ie on a sunny southern slope in a cold climate). Our powerful technology has made us so cocky that we think we can stuff our will down nature's throat. Which is true to some extent, but it comes at a price. Such as overconsumption of energy. DirkvdM 08:18, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need to urinate after drinking

After drinking quite a bit, I find I need to urinate. What's strange is that shortly thereafter, I get this constant urge to urinate, no matter how often I go to the bathroom. It's like an uncomfortable feeling, like I need to pee, but doesn't go away even after I do my business. Any ideas what causes this? --24.231.16.6 05:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Frequent urination after consumption of alcoholic beverages is quite normal; the ethanol suppresses the pituitary gland's production of the hormone vasopressin. Vasopressin triggers the kidneys to concentrate urine and retain water in the body; in its absence urine is much more dilute and has greater volume. It's possible that the reduced vasopressin concentration in the blood also triggers a psychological need to pee, but I'm speculating at this point. (Vasopressin has been implicated in certain aspects of memory formation, and the closely related compound oxytocin is definitely psychoactive.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 06:02, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate that. Maybe I can add another idea (though this is speculation also). I understand that one of the symptoms of a diabetic is the desire to drink more water and the urge to urinate more. Maybe an excessive consumption of alcohol leads to a higher blood sugar level. I'm 230lbs, 6'2", my ideal weight, I believe I'm about 40lbs overweight. Could this be somehow related? In any case, even directly after urination I still get the uncomfortable feeling that I need to conduct my business with nature. Could this be linked with the excess sugar level (if my speculation is correct)? --24.231.16.6 06:21, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Yea, that speculation sounds reasonable to me. Alcohol is quickly metabolized into blood sugar by the body. An overweight heavy drinker is quite susceptible to diabetes. You should have your blood glucose level checked. StuRat 06:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
My friends and I refer to this as "breaking the seal". Once you urinate the first time, you have to keep getting back up to visit the bathroom again. Dismas|(talk) 13:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I've noticed when I really have to urinate badly, that after I go, a few minutes later, I have to go again, with perhaps 1/3 the original volume. I attribute this to urine "backing up" into the kidneys, although the term "backing up" isn't quite right, since the urine does go backwards, it just fails to move to the bladder. StuRat 14:01, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

The frequent urge to urinate can also be a sign of some type of urinary tract obstruction-- for example, Benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostatitis, neurogenic bladder, or other functional derangement of the urethral sphincter. This often manifests as urinary retention, or the sense that the bladder retains residual urine after urination.--Mark Bornfeld DDS 15:30, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] mountains are cold

We know mountains are cold and kavir (salty desret) is hot. why?

Altitude and rainfall. Night Gyr 08:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but I suppose the question is how altitude causes mountains to be cold. My first thought was that peaks are more exposed and thus radiate more warmth. But that doesn't explain the cold of a high mesa (or what is that called?), like Tibet. DirkvdM 08:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
At a quick guess, the common factor is altitude. Higher altitudes have less atmosphere for insulation and thus retain less heat. Of course, for the question at hand, many deserts are also relatively cold at night, lacking water vapor and/or cloud cover for extra insulation. — Lomn Talk 15:47, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] homosexuals

can homosexuals be treated through psychiatry???

If a homosexual has mental health problems, psychiatry might be helpful. The same is true for heterosexuals, by the way. David Sneek 09:23, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I think the question presupposes that homosexuality is a mental condition that needs to be treated. It is a perfectly normal way of being for a significant proportion of humans, and is not any kind of condition. The question is based on a false premise. JackofOz 09:32, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Ask yourself if your heterosexuality can be "cured" thru psychiatry ... then you will know how homosexuals feel when they hear such a suggestion. StuRat 09:58, 14 January 2006 (UTC) i am a homosexual.that is why i am asking this question. Homosexuality is not considered a disorder, and most people would be offended by the suggestion. There are places where far-right religious groups attempt to do this, but it basically amounts to psychological torture. The Nazis spearheaded similar efforts. The result is usually the creation real psychological disorder (for obvious reasons) or at least personal trauma of some kind, not a change in the person's sexual orientation. --Tothebarricades 11:53, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

The answers are certainly politically correct, but not entirely factually correct. There are people with homosexual orientation who have sought treatment to change it and there are doctors who have sought to help them. Treatments in recent decades in Western society have been voluntary not involuntary and have not involved anything that would commonly be considered "torture" (i.e., no involuntary unpleasantness to the body). The success rates for these treatments do not seem to be large and "relapse" (for lack of a better word) is reportedly common. The arguments above that (1) homosexuality is not a disease, (2) one should not attempt to change this orientation for oneself, and (3) that it would be unethical to attempt to help someone change his/her orientation reflect a reaction to historical social mistreatment of people with homosexual orientation, are political attitudes which should not be presented as "facts", and are in logical contradiction to the general social POV that humans shuould be able to own and develop their own sense of sexuality found throughout Wikipedia and educated western society. This is exactly what political correctness is: socially enforced maintenance of a single political viewpoint on an issue for which more general ethical principles would allow a different or more than one opinion. Those who feel compelled to rebut, please address what is said here rather than supplying me with opinions I do not hold. alteripse 14:42, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Well said! And you actually used political correctness correctly, which is as rare as an original simile. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 17:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
    Huh? The way I read the political correctness article intro, it seems he used the term incorrectly and redefined in a way that supports his personal viewpoint of political correctness (although perhaps unintentionally). According to it, the term "political correctness" usually applies to language ("firefighter"/"fireman") and not really to things like whether homosexuality is a disease (which falls within how Alteripse defines it). The way Alteripse uses the term, he is including (liberal) political viewpoint in his generalization of "political correctness" - not that it's "wrong" (it's his POV), but that's not really factual since the term usually doesn't include anything about something so non-lingual as whether homosexuality is a disease.
    In either case, though, the debate over what is "political correctness" doesn't belong here - the more important thing I wanted to note is that a question like this will attract lots of POVs, and everything should be taken as opinion whether it is stated with "I think"s or not. --AySz88^-^ 05:10, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Good point, AySz88, about everything here being opinion. However, political correctness does include ideas that have been deemed to be "inappropriate". Depending on whom you ask, this might include a belief in white supremecy, speaking against immigration, men oppening doors for women, wishing people a "Merry Christmas", saying that one doubts that many top femal golphers could beat a top male golpher, pointing out that in order for some kids to be "above average" there must be other kids that are "below average", or any other idea that is deemed to be potentially offensive to a group of people. Johntex\talk 05:20, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
This is a topic of some debate. The overwhelming consensus of the psychiatric community is that 1) changing sexual orientation is either exceedingly difficult or, more likely, impossible, but 2) that's fine, because no sexual orientation needs treatment anyway - it is society's oppressive views that need changing. [57] A very few professionals disagree with this opinion in one way or another. Some believe that people should be allowed to seek therapy to change their sexual orientation if they choose because it might work, while a very few believe that non-heterosexuality is a problem per se and so should be treated. (This view, however, is much more common among people who aren't mental health professionals and particularly among people who have religious reasons for disapproving of homosexuals.)
Research on changin sexual orientation has been done for years, though it is very uncommon these days for the reasons mentioned above. Unfortunately, most of the research is of a rather low quality; further, there has been no research that I'm aware of on converting htereosexuals to homosexuality, so it's hard to give a definitive answer to your question. Suffice to say that it seems that a few people can change, but probably not the overwhelming majority of people. --George 20:53, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Awesome answer, alteripse. Johntex\talk 03:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I'd like to add a note about how and why various psychological conditions become "disorders" or "diseases" (or have such classifications taken away, as in the case of homosexuality) in the field of medicine. The main reasons are usually bureaucratic rather than political. The way modern medicine works is that every medical condition, procedure, problem, disorder, etc., must have a code. Without said code, insurance companies (and/or the government) will not pay the doctor's or hospital's bills. Thus, every time a new edition of the standard manual of psychological disorders is published, it is much larger than the last (as are the manuals for all other fields of medicine), because it's the only way psychiatrists, psychologists, therapists, and other health professionals can get paid for the latest and greatest treatments. As a result, there is tremendous pressure on the commitees responsible for such manuals to accept almost every newly coined term in medicine, regardless of how many people actually may qualify as having any such new given condition, or even whether it's been generally accepted throughout the entire medical commitee. In short, it's a very, very political process, and always has been. Usually the politics are driven by business interests, but sometimes they're politics of a far more ideological nature, which is what happened in the case of homosexuality being dropped from the DSM-IV. Does the fact that homosexuality was removed from the DSM-IV truly mean that homosexuality is unquestionably not a mental disorder (in the purely clinical sense of "not being the norm")? Or that it unquestionably is? Not at all. Even now, in the early 21st century, we know very little about the way the brain works, and even less as to what truly causes a given person to grow up to self-identify as belonging to a particular sexual orientation. It s entirely possible that, at some point in the future, someone will come up with some sort of gene therapy that will cause all humans to whom it is given to lose all homosexual urges. Likewise, someone could come up with a therapy to make all humans gain homosexual urges. Maybe it will never happen. We just don't know. And these possibilities will remain no matter what the psychological establishment deems to be The One Truth on this, or any other, psychological issue. --Aaron 04:16, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Another very informative answer! What is a "disorder" is somewhat in the eyes of the beholder. Overeating, smoking, and flying on the space shuttle are all unhealthy in the sense that they reduce one's life expectancy, statistially speaking. There are certainly clinical efforts to help people quit smoking and overeating - not sure about the shuttle. :-) Should they all be considered disorders? Johntex\talk 04:49, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

As a person who does not discriminate by gender, I take great exception to Alteripse's implication that "homosexuality is not a disease" is a political stance. There is far more evidence that homosexuality is a natural phenomenon than a disease/disorder. To "wait for findings", as it were, would be like questioning the holocaust because you've never visited Germany. It has far reaching social, not political, consequences. I know what you are proposing doesn't necessarily imply homophobia, but it fosters it terribly.—the preceding unsigned comment is by Bethefawn (talk • contribs) 22:44, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

    • You can take exception but you are flat wrong. Making a behavioral condition a "disease" is a social and political act. It was a political act to make it a disease and it was an intensely and overtly political act in the 1970s when it was declared not a disease. In other words, calling it a disease or calling it not a disease are both political acts. Sorry if you find that disturbing, but it is a clear example of how a disease can be created or banished by politics and social consensus. To not understand this is naive. alteripse 06:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Alteripse, you are providing a false dilemma. I understand your little thought experiment, and it is no doubt technically accurate. But it is incomplete and it is sophistry. Regardless of political connotations, homosexuality is probably a natural option for certain human beings. Given that this is the case, not being a homophobe does not have to be a reaction to the movement of some to consider it a disease in the past. What is naive is not understanding how playing the devil's advocate can hurt real feelings. Especially those who have to defend their way of life from widespread, socially-accepted hostility. There's no evidence that this hostility isn't nature trying to wipe out homosexuality, but anyone who argued it seriously would probably be considered unreasonable. Bethefawn 07:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
So I am clear about your position, your objection to my points is not that they are untrue but that they are politically inconvenient or pernicious? alteripse 14:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Alteripse, you are playing word games and not addressing any of my points at any time. I won't rise to it anymore. You want to post the rules to me? "Don't Be A Dick" and "Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point." Just stop. I got beat up in grade school for being smart too, but we can

always grow up. Bethefawn 04:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Some people are born with cystic fibrosis. Does that make it a "natural phenomenom" or a "disease". These are really just labels. Johntex\talk 05:52, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Alteripse, you are quite correct about the status of homosexuality being a moveable feast. It used to be considered a disease, now it's not. The same was true for left-handedness, and many southpaws suffered all their lives as a result of being forced to use their right hand. No parent or teacher in their right mind would do that now (I hope). However, the branding of those who support the removal of discrimination on the basis of sexuality, as "politically correct", is somewhat provocative. However you may define the term "politically correct", you know that it is widely used as a put-down, and you must know that that is how it will be perceived. (Or maybe that was your intention; I'm having difficulty divining your real point). Also, just as you were entitled to contribute your opinion to this debate, so are others. It is not a case of people being "compelled to rebut", and it is not for you to dictate what they say ("please address what is said here"). By definition, in a debate there are different opinions, so telling others not to "supply [you] with opinions [you] do not hold" seems to suggest that you are not open to hearing any other opinions than your own. Have I misunderstood you? JackofOz 07:02, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
      • In response to your question as to why I added that tag: I was hoping to ward off tedious accusations that I was endorsing forced treatment or that as a personal opinion I considered it a disease (my opinion is that it is a human difference). I knew it would be provocative because pointing out PC always is, but I am somewhat contrarian and thought the previous answers needed broadening of POV. I was actually reacting to the shallow understanding of the social nature of behavioral disease definitions displayed in those answers more than to their opinion about whether h should be classified as a disease or not. And I have several times expressed my opinion that several POVs can be represented in a ref desk answer without censorship. At least no one removed my answer because they thought it was politically unacceptable (as has happened a few times here). alteripse 14:05, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Why is it that the questions that don't deserve to be taken seriously often result in such long threads, the exact opposite of what one would expect? Or are there social envirinments where this might be considered a normal question. And can such environments be treated through psychiatry? :) DirkvdM 08:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Because there's always a devil's advocate (User:Alteripse).
Don't forget that we have an article on this: reparative therapy. --Heron 20:19, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, but we've also got an article on religion, which doesn't mean we have to take that seriously. DirkvdM 09:16, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] computer science projects

what kind of process power is used for artificial intelligence? please explain

from julie

thank you, ps i need this asap

Do your own homework. Things to watch out for:
  • "please explain..."
  • "i need this asap" (why, because you're building a robot tomorrow? sheesh.)
-Quasipalm 18:44, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Your question is far too generalized. Most video games have AI in them now. The bad guys you run around and shoot are operating on AI. Also, there are very small AI devices that do things like judge if someone has entered a room and then turn on the security camera. If you are looking to re-create a human brain with electronics, you'll have to wait about 15 years and be very rich or wait another 30 and buy a basic home PC. --Kainaw (talk) 14:34, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Ugh. I hate this watered-down use of the term AI to refer to things that could never pass even the simplest Turing test. We don't have actual artificial intelligence (machines that can think and learn as we do) yet, and it will probably be a long time before we do. —Keenan Pepper 23:39, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Years ago, after an AI class in college, I suggested that the big problem in creating artificial intelligence is that nobody really knows what intelligence is. On ther other hand, everybody knows what stupid is! So let's start first with artificial stupidity. To my great surprise, that's kinda what happened: expert systems are artificial stupidity! --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 04:57, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Many speculate that strong AI will feature in the technological singularity, due to occur as early 30 years from now. But I think your question is more material than theoretical. AI use whatever kind of process power that can support them. Primitive AI work on household electronics, and it is likely that very advanced AI will work on newer systems that have yet to be invented. Not surprisingly, AI has no "natural" habitat. Bethefawn 05:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

See also Thinking PC above. DirkvdM 08:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

If you consider what it is that helped humans evolve into becoming sentient (self-aware) and have other attributes we call intelligence, it included the opposable thumb on our hands, and our wide range of senses. Now consider the average computer. Can it SEE like us? How do those robot housecleaners see to navigate the floor and avoid obstacles and tell the difference between real dirt on the floor, and something we dropped and not want thrown out? How do those robot experiments locate a wall socket to refule themselves at? User:AlMac|(talk) 08:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Twistors?

I'm reading a book on string theory but its slightly outdated. There are several chapters on twistors, and I'm wondering if the notion that the concept of the twistor may aid the quest for a theory of everything is still taken seriously in the scientific community. Because I don't want to waste my time otherwise. --Tothebarricades 11:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I can offer only a partial answer (due to my own knowledge limitations). Depends on which scientist you ask. Roger Penrose who came up with twistors still likes them, but he seems to admit that they are not on the mainstream, see his book The Road to Reality. However, you must decide why you ask-- Do you wish to be expert on what others think? or do you seek the truth? Since fundamentally NOBODY knows what the right answer is, nobody knows if twistors will be part of the RIGHT TOE of the future. So nobody knows if it's a waste of time. GangofOne 15:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Methamatical brain

I have been asked to prepare a methamatical model of brain can u help me by telling me how to prepare it?

Could you be more specific? And, if this is school homework, we really aren't supposed to do it for you. But help I guess is fine. --Tothebarricades 12:01, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Good preparation would be get PhDs in Math, Computer Science, and neuroscience. Then read On Intelligence by Jeff Hawkins, Sandra Blakeslee ISBN 0805074562 . They seem to have some new insights on just this problem. GangofOne 16:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Achieving this would be a good first step towards fame and fortune. :) DirkvdM 08:19, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
  • What is that brain you are modelling supposed to be able to do? - 82.172.14.108 13:07, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
You might look at Neural network. DJ Clayworth 15:47, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Do you know how long the Human Genome project took, and the high level of expertise needed by all the participants? I imagine the Human Brainome project will need just as much high powered intellect. User:AlMac|(talk) 09:00, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

That's not really the same thing. Mapping the human genome only required working out where specific (and mostly invariant) chemicals sat on a string. 'Mapping' the brain in the same way would require working out how countless neurons connect to each other in even more countless ways, and they would be very different for each person. So, I guess I'm saying the brain would take even longer. Black Carrot 23:30, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] mass media

is cellphone a mass media?

I believe this was already asked and answered. StuRat 13:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Here it is. David Sneek 17:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Volcanos

Is there any sort of connection between Mount St. Helens and Augustine Volcano? The reason I ask is because of the recent activity at MSH and now in the last few days there have been eruptions at AV. Are they connected to the same "vein" of lava or anything like that? I mean, I know that the center of the Earth is liquid but am unfamiliar with the interconnectivity of volcanos if any exists. Dismas|(talk) 13:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

They are both near the boundary of the Juan de Fuca Plate. Plate movement influences seismic activity, which in turn is believed to influence volcanic activity. To claim that the Juan de Fuca plate is influencing them, you would have to show an increase in activity of some sort along the plate and then show that that activity has increased volcanic activity in the past. --Kainaw (talk) 19:43, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! Dismas|(talk) 15:28, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] i have AMD sempron 64-bit processor(2500+) to install xp 64-bit or not

i have AMD sempron 64-bit processor(2500+) my doubt is weather to install windows xp 64-bit or to install windows xp 32-bit

system configuration AMD sempron 64-bit processor(2500+) 1400 MHz L2 CACHE: 256 kb L1 CACHE: 64 kb 256 MB DDR 400 MHz RAM ASUS TEK K8V-MX MOTHER BOARD 40 GB SEGATE 7200 RPM HARD DISK IF I WAS ABLE TO INSTALL WINDOWS XP X64 DOES IT SUPPORT MY 32-BIT APPLICATIONS, PLESE SAY SOME THING...

You could install Windows x64 and it should supposedly run faster, but the problem is that many consumer applications aren't written to support 64-bit natively. It will support your 32-bit applications, because of WOW64, but I don't know how stable it is. You may see a slight performance boost, but personally I am waiting for Windows Vista to come out until I get a 64-bit OS, and I'm running an AMD Athlon 64 3200+ — Ilyanep (Talk) 18:55, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I know someone who's tried x64 Windows, and while applications ran ok, the problem was with drivers. Btw, don't write in all capitals. enochlau (talk) 07:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

DON'T SHOUT DirkvdM 08:20, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] iTunes

Automatic synchronization can be turned off in favor of manually copying individual songs or complete playlists; however, iTunes supports only copying music to the iPod but not from it, which has inspired third party software for the latter purpose. -itunes What are some good programs that do this?

Also, what is the key combination that prevents auto-synchronization from ocurring (so as to not wipe out an iPod if the computer doesn't have the same files). Thanks -Jian —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JianLi (talk • contribs) 13:27, January 14, 2006.

You don't mention whether this is on a Mac or a PC. So as far as programs, I would suggest going to some shareware site like http://www.shareware.com or the like and searching for a program for your particular platform. Although I can't testify to the legality of this since you could be trying to bypass copyrights by putting music that you bought onto your iPod then putting it on someone else's system who hasn't paid for the music. So, to borrow a phrase from another of my past times... Tread lightly... Dismas|(talk) 21:18, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
There's nothing inherently illegal about wanting to copy from an iPod back to a Mac or PC. Most people want such a feature purely for backup purposes; if something happens to your computer's hard drive, at least you can use such programs to copy the data back to the new hard drive you install in your computer. --Aaron 04:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
JianLi: The key combination is CMD + Option on the Mac and Shift + Ctrl in Windows. Please read this page before connecting your iPod to the other computer just to be on the safe side (it's just two short paragraphs). As for programs to copy from the iPod to the computer, I personally like Senuti and iPodRip for Mac OS X and iPod Access for Windows, but there are plenty of programs that perform this function. Visit Versiontracker for Windows or Versiontracker for Mac OS X and run a search on "ipod copy" or "ipod sync" if you'd like to see what other programs are out there. --Aaron 04:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neurology

Can neurology ( meaning my brain's chemistry and structure) and my experiences, acount for all my feelings and thoughts? even my most abstract ones? I need to know this, because I am a psychology student torn between the phisicalist theories and the theories that say that my brain is some sort of radio reciever and my mind is something more ethereal or whatever... I particularly don't prefer one or the other...well I think I'd rather be just a mamal that can be explained by neurology, but the other theory doesn't bother me too much, what bothers me is not knowing which is true, so I was wondering if there has been any conclusive neurology breakthrough that settles this question.--Cosmic girl 17:57, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

That is a fairly hot topic these days. Consciousness covers the issues pretty well. Bottom line, there is no right answer on this one unless you already have a preconceived notion.--◀Pucktalk▶ 18:02, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Mind-body problem is another article that discusses the issue.--◀Pucktalk▶ 18:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

what to u mean by there's no right? there's no right yet maybe... but I'm confident there will be! :D... I've already read those, but are u sure there's no consensus yet? because I think that the phisicalist view is ahead of the mystical one, because of the advanes of neurology and how some regions of the brain correspond to certain habilities and senses, but I've also read some weird stories that maybe are true but I find it hard to believe... one is that a guy had almost no brain because he had hidrocefalia (I misspelled that I guess)and he functioned normally...so, but I can't believe everything I read so ...--Cosmic girl 18:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion the materialist perspective is a tautology. It is the best approach to those things that are susceptible to empirical analysis--hence the wonders of science--but it dismisses anything that cannot be so analyzed as non-existent rather than just saying they are beyond its scope. Gnosis is often outside the realm of objective analysis and cannot be subjected to materialist investigation. However, any claims regarding its objective truth are subject to investigation and should be tested rigorously.--◀Pucktalk▶ 19:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Many have been the claims that "X cannot be subjected to materialist investigation". Such claims stimulate research; scientists take them as a challenge. If you have not seen it, you might want to read Crick's book The Astonishing Hypothesis. --JWSchmidt 19:27, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I think what that person means by "no right answer" is that, as you say, there's no right answer yet. Certainly the view that mental phenomena are explicable entirely in terms of physical phenomena is the one currently most widely accepted by experts - neurologists, philosophers of mind, that sort of person. But like just about every other opinion in philosophy, that view has its problems and there are some people who don't believe it. I think most philosophers who buy the physicalist view do so becaus 1) it has fewer problems than the dualist view, and 2) science seems to be pointing in that direction. The answer to your question, though, is that there is no answer yet. I suggest reading on the topic and making up your own mind. --George 20:45, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

thanks a lot,you all gave me very useful responses. --Cosmic girl 22:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What does /opt in UNIX stand for ?

In UNIX operating systems, there is a standard directory by name /opt. Is it an acronym ? What does it stand for ? Filesystem Hierarchy Standard has got meanings of all standard directories except /opt. Jay 18:17, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

See [58]. Its name stands for optional. – b_jonas 18:34, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. But I couldn't find where it says that opt stands for optional. Can you point out the line ? Jay 09:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I think I was just guessing with optional. I don't think the standard says it anywhere. Sorry. – b_jonas 14:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] why do a needs assessment?

I Googled "needs assessment" and this was on top of the list: [59] --Mattopaedia 23:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Baryons 2

Is there such a thing as a Theta (Θ) baryon?

Google search for "theta baryon" - it is apparently an Exotic baryon. If your question is "is their existence widely accepted or are they merely conjectured" I can't help you. -- Rick Block (talk) 21:24, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Automated time updating for *n*x

I currently use ntpdate tick.usno.navy.mil to set the clock on my slakware box when I think about it. The problem is I don't often think about it. It's been up for 85 days and I just reset the clock because it was off by about 10 minutes. Would it be better to run it as a cron job or with at? Or is there some better way? Whichever way you suggest, a clue about syntax would be appreciated as well.--◀Pucktalk▶ 20:44, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

The standard way to do this is to run a Network Time Protocol client. You might want to google "ntp slackware". -- Rick Block (talk) 21:11, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I thought ntpdate was an ntp client. But I did do the google search you suggested and found the syntax for adding it to root's crontab. Thanks.--◀Pucktalk▶ 23:32, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
It's better to use ntpd instead, since it will not only correct the time offset, but also the frequency (avoiding time jumps). It can even automatically compensate for leap seconds. --cesarb 17:34, 15 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Fibrinolysis

Hello I was jus wonderin if you can give me a simple explanation of fibrinolysis as i am very confused on this matter. Thank u very much Lawrence

Have you read the article on it, see Fibrinolysis? -- Rick Block (talk) 21:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Its a pretty simple article if you ignore the heavy biochem in the second paragraph Mattopaedia 00:14, 15 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Speed of light and time travel

I was intrigued by the previous post, which brought about a certain old thought of mine. If we could go faster than the speed of light into space, would we be able to "pass" the light from a historical situation and see it, such as we see stars as they were a long time ago? How would it look if we were looking back? Let's say we were going at cx2 with our backs outward. Would it just look like rewinding a tape? is this possible?

[edit] January 15

[edit] Involuntary movement in the face

Sometimes I get involuntary small movements on my face, usually either near my eyes or lips. They feel like one small muscle is flexing at its own will. What is this called? Lapinmies 00:24, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Try tic. --69.154.179.63 01:05, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Technically it is a fasciculation rather than a tic. The distinction is a fine one. alteripse 03:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe it's just a twitch? Twitches are common, and happen when the muscles are tired. -- Daverocks 10:29, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] malnutrion

Are you looking for malnutrition? If you need spelling help, please use Google or dictionary.com next time. --AySz88^-^ 03:25, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe it's a badly ionised neutron. DirkvdM 09:19, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ships

Why do ships float? Can you provide data about ships such as cruise liners - weight, volume, etc? Thank you, in advance, for your assistance.

Robert Bost

The float because of Archimedes' principle. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 03:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
See also List of cruise ships for info on tonnage, etc. Johntex\talk 03:30, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ethidium bromide

Can ethidium bromide really change your DNA? (I heard this mentioned on a rerun of ER.) The article mentions that it's mutagenic, but it doesn't go into specifics. What would be the effect of exposure?

Ethidium bromide binds to the DNA which can cause mutations when cells divide. Since the surface of your skin is dead, the chance of a single exposure of dilute EtBr causing any harm would be minimal. However people working with concentrated EtBr might be at more risk. Concnetrated EtBr can also cause acute poisioning.--nixie 07:33, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Ethidium bromide is an intercolating agent. This means that the ethidium bromide molecule (which is mainly flat) can inset itself between two DNA bases. As said above, this can lead to errors when the DNA is replicated during cell division. So, the problem is not that your current DNA is being "changed", it is that new copies of your DNA would contain errors. This could lead to serious problems, such as cancer. When working with ethidium bromide, one should always wear latex gloves and avoid any contact with skin, eyes, or any other part of the body. Johntex\talk 07:38, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
  • That's very bad advice, in both cases. EtBr can penetrate the skin, and also latex gloves. If you're in direct contact (or risk direct contact) with it you should wear nitrile gloves. At the labs I've visited where EtBr is in use (electrophoresis), they've restricted its use to a single room, in which nitrile gloves must be worn at all times, nothing should be touched without gloves and nothing not strictly necessary should be brought either in or out. --BluePlatypus 17:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bigfoot movie

??

This?
  • There's been numerous films involving big foot. I little more detail would help towards identifying the one you're thinking of. - 82.172.14.108 13:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Try Harry and the Hendersons. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Laundry balls

How do laundry balls work?

See this article at HowStuffWorks.com. And the newly created article on the Downy ball. Dismas|(talk) 15:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Aha Dismas, so this is where you lurk for Newpage ideas. ;-) hydnjo talk 19:40, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I think the questioner is probably not referringto those, but to the plastic balls that replace detergent, (one brand is called "eco-balls")http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_007b.html or http://www.dooyoo.co.uk/household-products/eco-balls/1003126/ in my experience the answer to the question "how do they work?" is "not very well". The get rid of dirt but not smells like stale smoke. Jooler
The remarkable truth is that a good washing machine working with clean, hot water (not too hard) will get unstained clothes to be pretty clean without soap, laundry balls, or deep magicks. Remember that a normal spin and wash cycle puts your clothing through a half hour or so of shaking and wringing using two full tubs of water; you can pull quite a bit of dirt out that way.
Laundry balls take advantage of this fact. The amusing claims [60] about 'paramagnetic force', 'far infrared electromagnetic waves', 'a concentrated fluid that has been treated with specific naturally occurring high frequency fields', 'structured water', and so forth are just so much nonsense designed to part you from fifty to seventy-five dollars for an inert lump of plastic (and sometimes metal). A marginal improvement over plain water might be seen because the ball bouncing about in the washing machine tub can act as a beater that provides a bit of added scrubbing action. The Straight Dope neatly summarizes a study by Consumer Reports: "...you can get equally good results tossing your kid's Koosh ball in the washing machine...".
As Jooler notes above, the balls do just fine with regular mildly soiled clothing—all that stuff will come out with extensive water rinsing and mechanical action, balls or not. Removing stains, smells, and greasy stuff takes a surfactant–good old-fashioned soap–and it's unsurprising that the laundry ball would fall down here. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:06, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biodiesel and Ethanol

What is the difference between biodiesel and bioethanol, or is bioethanol a type of biodiesel?

Bioethanol is, well, ethanol - the stuff that makes you do stupid things if you drink too much vodka (or any other alcoholic drink). It's produced by yeast causing fermentation. It's called "bioethanol" because you can also produce ethanol chemically from petroleum. Biodiesel are processed vegetable oils extracted from crops like sunflower oil, rapeseed and so on. Oils are long-chain hydrocarbons. Ethanol is used as a substitute for gasoline, whereas biodiesels are used to replace diesel fuel. The other difference is that the net energy return of biodiesel from temperate-climate crops is reasonable (but not great); the net energy return from ethanol made from grain or corn is very, very marginal (you need to burn almost as much fuel as you get from the process). Ethanol made using some newer processes, or from sugar cane, doesn't suffer this problem. Read the articles for more information.--Robert Merkel 12:23, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
That would be the articles Ethanol fuel and biodiesel. Rmhermen 19:52, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why does bandwidth cost money?

Why does bandwidth cost money?

As an end user, you will be buying bandwidth from a supplier who is buying the bandwidth, and selling it to you at (they hope) a profit. What you pay also covers adminstrative costs, such as the cost of sending you bills, and their own electricity bills. They in turn buy the bandwidth from someone else who is trying to make a profit. Ultimately, bandwidth charges become rather more complicated, when you arrive at the people who actually put in the wires and equipment; they are charging a fee for bandwidth to pay for the cost of running wires and buying equipment, and the smaller ongoing costs of maintenance and electricity, and (they hope) eventually cover the money they invested and make a profit. Notinasnaid 11:44, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
You could similarly ask how come public highways cost money to build. All infrastructure has expenses to build and maintain, and the organizations that do this work need to be recompensed somehow for their efforts. User:AlMac|(talk) 09:04, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] time

is it true that time is slowing down since last year??

Err, no. No it isn't. However, see leap second for the reason behind making the year slightly longer now and then. GeeJo (t) (c) • 13:47, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
This is a meaningless question as it would have to be qualified by asking what time could possibly slow down relative to. It can only be measured against itself. It's a bit like asking whether length is getting longer. However, there have recently been controversial suggestions that the speed of light, which is considered a fundamental constant, might vary. --Shantavira 14:30, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
While time isn't slowing down -- the earth is. Since our system of time is tied to the length of an Earth day, and since the earth's rotation is very slowing 15 microseconds a year, we needed to add an extra second every once in a while to realign the two. Why is the rotation slowing? Because of the moon: read more at Moon#Orbit and Moon#Earth & Moon. --Quasipalm 17:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] cpu's

how do the following technologies differ: Intel dual core cpu, intel prescott cpu, AMD athlon cpu, AMD semprom cpu and 64bit cpu

Dual-core means basically two processors on the same chip. Prescott is Intel's code name for a specific family of Pentium 4 processors. Athlon and Sempron are AMD's names for larger families (Sempron is generally cheaper and slower than Athlon). 64-bit refers to a different processor architecture that uses 64 bit addressing, so more than 4G of virtual memory can be used. —Keenan Pepper 19:35, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] cryrtals

crystallization processers

You mean Crystallization processes? What about them? GeeJo (t) (c) • 14:46, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] computer science projects

Where is artificial intelligence used, in businesses, industry or manufacturing?please expand

from julie

This does look very much like a homework question. Can you tell us otherwise, Julie? Notinasnaid 14:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Nowhere. True artificial intelligence does not exist yet. Some manufacturers may want you to believe that their product is 'intelligent' but that's just marketing bull. Tell your teacher that. In those exact words, please. And then report back the result if you will. Is that enough expansion? :) DirkvdM 09:29, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Dirk, that is unfair to the many commercial products that are the results of AI-related research. Some of the links off the artificial intelligence article may help; I'll even give a couple of big hints: expert systems, and fuzzy logic. --Robert Merkel 12:14, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
The reason for my remark is that the term 'intelligence' is being misused in what is called artificial intelligence. Fuzzy logic is somewhat on the right track. And then there is this professor at the University of Uppsala, I believe, who sort of has the right idea. But expert systems are most definitely not intelligent. Pure intelligence can start with nothing but some general rules of how input can be processed to create a world view, which can then be used to survive in the real world. All animals have some a priori knowledge about how to deal with reality to give them a head start. Humans have less of this (babies are born almost helpless) and focus more on the intelligence bit. But a system that is simply preprogrammed and has at most a very limited ability to learn is most definitely not intelligent. And those 'intelligent' computer games are really a laugh. Hell, they don't even have a possibility to experiment, a basic requirement of intelligence. How else can one learn as an independent being? DirkvdM 19:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and check out jpgordon's reply in the homonymous thread above. DirkvdM 19:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
True. Making human-like "artificial intelligence" has proven exceedingly difficult ot do. But I just want to add that that's not because the people who have tried are dumb. A lot of brilliant people have spent decades on these kind of problems, and have come up with many useful things. But passing the Turing test, for instance, is much, much harder than people thought it would be. --Robert Merkel

[edit] Biohazard

What is the biohazard symbol meant to represent? smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 14:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

According to this article, it was originally designed to be "memorable but meaningless". —David Wahler (talk) 15:07, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
David just got in before me with that. To give the obvious answer, it represents a biological hazard. The colors yellow and black are often used to symbolize hazards, even in nature, so they have become the norm. The circles suggest to me expanding spheres of influence. --Shantavira 15:16, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
My guess is it is graphically derived from the radiation warning symbol, which was created in 1946 to look like a radiating atom. --Fastfission 15:28, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Interesting article. I'm impressed at how they actually did surveys to pick the least "associative" symbol they could find. --BluePlatypus 16:51, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Oddly, I just noticed a resemblance to a cell after a couple of divisions. I don't know if it was in some way intentional (by the sounds of it not). smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 17:36, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] computer sciences

What are the future trends for artificial intelligence?

  • Who could know for sure? See our article on artificial intelligence, which discusses where we are now, where people think we are going, and where people have imagined we could end up. --Fastfission 15:34, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Why not just put all your homework questions in one entry? --Kainaw (talk) 22:46, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Because then we couldn't use templates like {{subst:User:Cernen/Template:dyoh}} as frequently, of course. Which reminds me. Please do your own homework. We are not going to help you cheat. We do or have already done our homework; it's your turn to do yours. Your question may be deleted if you see this notice; you should reformat it to prevent this from happening. Cernen Xanthine Katrena 10:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Drivers for wireless cards

My girlfriend has an old Windows 2000 laptop with no wireless capability. I have a wireless card (PEAK Wireless; IEEE802.11b CardBus PC Card). However, her laptop can't find a driver for it. I've searched everywhere online for 'Peak wireless drivers', but can't find anything. Is there any other way of getting her computer to recognize the card, or a better online driver repository? My computer, which I assume has the driver, is busted, so that's out.

Thanks! — Asbestos 16:07, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

    • Yay! I have no idea why I couldn't find that before. Thanks! — Asbestos 16:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] kbps

i have subscribed 2 a 56kbps internet connection but when i look at the connection speed it is usually between 49kbps and 50kbps .am i being cheated out of 6-7 kbps???--212.72.3.57 17:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I assume you mean it's a dialup connection. In practice you never get all 56k; depending on line conditions (the distance and quality of wiring between your home and the digital modem in the telephone company's office). In addition, some countries (such as the UK) clamp the actual connection at 53k (I'm not sure why; some interference issue perhaps). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:25, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

i meant a dailup connection but why does it--212.72.3.57 18:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC) happen

The wires between you and your Internet Service Provider are not perfect. they have electrical resistace and static, which degrade the signal and cause a loss in data flow. --Shanedidona 18:35, 15 January 2006 (UTC) thnx 4 clarifying

The one of the biggest causes of degradation to signals on a POTS telephone line is due to branches and joins in the cable. An older cable is more likely to have been patched and joined in this manner (the cables in many houses and apartment buildings are often as old as the building itself). Whenever a signal crosses a join between two conductors a proportion of it is reflected back from the join (in much the same way as your reflection in a double-glazed window shows multiple images of you). Telephone engineers even have a tool that puts a special "ping" tone down a line and listens for the reflections - based on the timing it can tell you how many there are and roughly how far along the line each one is. Because of this phenomenon you'll often find that you get better analog modem and DSL speeds on newly installed telephone lines than on the ancient one that your grandparents had Alexander Graham Bell himself install. Similarly some long phone lines (for folks who live far from the phone company's offices) have (or had) loading coils; these coils help voice transmission, but impede DSL. In some places it's possible to order a "clean, unconditioned pair" from the phone company, which is a fresh length of copper without all the joins and coils on it. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Add to that a FCC limit on transmission frequencies which is well below 56k. --Kainaw (talk) 22:48, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the limit is 53 kbs. --Shanedidona 23:20, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] genetics, bird sexing

I am an amateur bird breeder, who is in contact with other bird owners and breeders, I desperately want to learn out to identify weather they are male or female, I have bought microscopes from hobby shops, but I can't find material, on what I should be looking at, or the strength of the microscope. I know it is identified through blood. Please, tell me how I can do this myself. Thank you very much. birdbrain252000@yahoo.com (birdbrain)

A quick google yielded:

  1. Testing labs like [61][62][63] which will determine sex from blood, feathers, or eggs for $18-25.
  2. Try joining an advanced birding list group if you are not already on one and ask if anyone has home lab methods: [64]. To subscribe to list:listserv@listserv.arizona.edu This list is described as "Discussion about highly difficult bird identification issues, mostly related to North America. subscription message: subscribe BIRDWG01 Your Name"

Good luck. alteripse 18:32, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Since adult birds usually look quite different depending on the gender, I am guessing you are asking about baby birds ? StuRat 09:17, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] error message

im getting this weird error message on my comp persistently

"iexplorer caused an invalid page fault in module kernel32.dll at 017f:bff76843 registers eax=007101d0 cs=017f eip=bff76843 eflgs=00210246 ebx=007101d0 ss=0187 esp=00710000 ebp=00710018 ecx=0071009c ds0187 esi=8179f5c0 fs=457f edx=bff76855 es=0187 edi=007100c4 gs=0000 bytes at cs:eip: ff 75 08 ff 55 18 83 c4 10 64 8f 05 00 00 00 00 stack dump 007101d0 007100e0 0071009c 007101d0 bff76855 007101d0 007100ac bff87fe9 007100c4 007101d0 007100e0 0071009c bff76855 00710288 8179f5c0 0080e58c" this problem is not confined 2 only i explorer but almost anyprogram i open i have a windows 98(second edition)and a petium 3 prcessor pls tell me what my problem is and how 2 rectify it on my own

There is a bug in some library or driver. I think an "invalid page fault" is the same thing as a segmentation fault, in which case it could be many different things. Try switching to Linux? —Keenan Pepper 19:46, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Try switching to Linux? :-) You took the words right out of my mouth.--◀Pucktalk▶ 20:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

But in the interests of trying to be helpful, you might try starting in safe mode to see if you encounter the same errors. If not it may be the result of some program running in the background while you are in normal mode. If I remember correctly, Windows 98 has a thing called MSConfig that allows you to remove items from your start up sequence without having to actually open regedit. I would suggest removing everything from start up and then seeing if your system is more stable. If you have to run Windows you should probably upgrade to Windows 2000 if not Windows XP. They aren't all that wonderful, but compared to Windows 98 they are more stable and reliable.--◀Pucktalk▶ 20:19, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

It can be anything, including bad CPU fan, bad memory, bad power supply, a large number of other potential hardware problems, and a broken Windows installation, which can be caused by normal cruft acumulation, a virus, or spyware. I'd recommend running a memory checker (like memtest86+), an antivirus, a spyware checker, and seeing how well it runs a CD-based Linux distribution such as Knoppix. If the tests all show the hardware is good, it might be a good idea to reinstall Windows. --cesarb 22:36, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the tip on memtest86+, I've always needed something like that that wasn't tied to a particular hardware vendor. Good lookin' out.--◀Pucktalk▶ 23:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RF Channel Selection

On some TV's why were channels 3 or 4 choosen as the channel to turn to for VCR/DVD operation?

The channel isn't chosen by the TV, it's the frequency produced by the RF modulator inside the VCR or DVD player. I'm not sure why they chose that channel, though. Night Gyr 20:45, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I seem to recall it's because very few places have both a channel 3 and a channel 4 broadcast, so at least one of those would be available. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 21:28, 15 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Evolution

Are there any proofs or signs about wheather we humans as a species have evolved over the period of the recorded history? around 6BC-present day.

Recorded history goes back a bit further than that-- maybe back to 2000-3000 BC depending on your criteria. I can think of at least some indirect evidence for at least one evolutionary change. I think there have been changes in the population frequency of genes conferring resistance to certain widespread diseases during that time. I suspect there are others but don't know any others off the top of my head. alteripse 21:24, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Humans have larger brains and longer lifespans. They are, on average, taller and fatter. The fatness may be from diet, but no diet is going to make you taller. Also look at the Olympic sports. If humans were not evolving in any way, the records would not continue to be broken. If you are religious and believe that every human came from just one man and one woman, then you have to look at the evolution of the different races from those two. African's hair handles heat better than the northerners (like the Vikings). However, the thin lips of the northerners handles the cold better than the Africans. You go through every racial difference and see how it is well-suited for the race's natural environment - that is evolution. --Kainaw (talk) 22:54, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
It's not true that no diet is going to make you taller. There is a good correlation between nutrition and height. E.g., compare average heights of North and South Korea. Records continue to be broken because continued improvements in nutrition. Also read Human_height#Determinants_of_growth_and_height --deeptrivia (talk) 00:05, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I should have stated that the potential for height is genetic. According to everything I've read, the average human height has increased about 4 inches since the early 1800s. Quick google: [65] [66] [67] That is just the first 3 hits. I would happily be incorrect if there are studies that show humans on average are getting shorter. I just haven't seen anything to support that view. --Kainaw (talk) 01:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
There are many studies demonstrating short-term (1-4 generations) fluctuations in both directions. The most well documented are those that show as much as an inch or more height gain in a single generation with immigration and better nutrition. This is not evolution, this is nutrition, and can be reversed with a famine. No one is disputing secular height trends (although they are more complex and bidirectional than you suggest) but that they do not represent genetic changes in the populations and hence have nothing to do with evolution. alteripse 01:41, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I also have to disagree with Kainaw. There is no evidence that the genetic height potential of humans has changed in recorded history. Heights are excruciatingly sensitive to environmental variables and can change either direction in a generation. This has nothing to do with evolution. alteripse 00:52, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Similarly, Olympic records prove nothing about evolution. In the 100+ years since the modern games began, there have been many improvements in the way athletes are selected and trained, not to mention a larger population to select them from in the first place.
Above, someone mentioned genes for disease resistance. That would be a more promising area. When two separated populations of humans meet, each one can catch diseases from the other. If a large fraction of one population is killed but some are resistant, you would expect the descendants of the survivors to be resistant today. That would qualify as evolution. I don't know if there has been research to confirm any examples of this, though.
--Anonymous, 05:38 UTC, January 16, 2006
One wellknown example of this is Population history of American indigenous peoples#Depopulation from disease --WS 14:28, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Red hair has developed fairly recently. --Black Carrot 07:14, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Funny how this is used to push a political view (comparing North and Sout Korea). Within one country there are differences in height depending on the income. At least, this has been found in the Netherlands, of all places. And I suppose it would be stronger where income differences are greater, ie in more heavily capitalist countries. DirkvdM 09:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Also, lactose tolerance might be a trait that's been selected for in western populations. Morwen - Talk 10:07, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

There have been two very important brain gene mutations in recorded history. The populace that got them, quickly killed the rest of the world, so they became common. I think there was one 60,000 years ago, which gave rise to art (cave paintings), and a spatial one (engineering) about 10,000 years ago. This is just from a decaying memory of a recent article. You might be able to find the references. --Zeizmic 13:38, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
DirkvdM: I don't see how deeptrivia's statement was "pushing" any political view. The people of North Korea are less well-nourished than the people of South Korea. That's not political, it's a fact. Given that they have the same genetics and similar diets, this would be the most reasonable explaination of the difference in average height. By comparison, your statement (South Korea having a less even distribution of wealth, and thus greater variance in height) seems much more speculative and political to me. The few communist countries on this list (China, Vietnam, Laos) fail to impress me in that respect. But in any case, even if you're right, it doesn't invalidate deeptrivia's point, since the average (statistical expectation value) and the spread (statistical variance) are unrelated properties, at least for a bell curve, which I'd assume the population height to follow. --BluePlatypus 19:52, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I meant, if examples abound in our own capitalist societies, why pick one in a distant country that 'very coincidentally' has to do with 'communism' (really socialism, but that's a different issue). There has to be an intention here. Actually, this introduces many more variables, thus obscuring what is probably the main cause for differences in height (even more than, say, 'race' - which is also a misnomer).
By the way, I'm not criticising Deeptrivia. I assume he's been indoctrinated as much as me and just came up with an example that he has been exposed to, which is only human. To escape this indoctrination one has to think for oneself, which isn't as easy as it sounds. The basic info is out there, one just has to work at it and filter out the bullshit, possibly reading between the lines of the propaganda channels. I've worked at this for years (as I gradually became more aware of my indoctrination) and I feel I've only scratched the surface. DirkvdM 07:40, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Or, perhaps you've accustomed yourself more and more to interpreting things that way, to the extent of seeing things which aren't there. As Freud said, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar". Korea may not be so 'distant' an example (it's relative to geography). And I disagree, it is a quite good example which elimates many variables, for instance ethnical variations. Both Koreas are some of the most (if not the most) ethnically and culturally homogenous nations in the world. That excludes most of the dietary and genetic factors. (And as a political sidenote: I see nothing either communist nor socialist about North Korea. All I see is one of the harshest dictatorships in the world, with no ideological justification from Marx or the Workers Movement.) --BluePlatypus 20:44, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Whichever the politics may be, the point is that they're completely different between the two countries, in load sof respects. And indeed one cannot put political schemes in nice groupings. So the only thing that is compared is the politics of those two countries. For any more general conclusions there are way too many variables. Which leaves the question why this example is chosen to find a cause for differences in height. Like I said, it can't be a coincidence that one of the two happens to be a so-called 'communist' country (which represent about 1% of the countries in the world). My example of differences within one country (and indeed one city) is a much better eliminator of variables. It's income that determines height. And lifespan, for that matter (also a finding in the Netherlands). DirkvdM 08:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Take a look at diseases like AIDS, Epidemics, Plagues. I think there is clear evidence that once upon a time various diseases did not occur, did not exist, then here they are causing all kinds of chaos. If you do not believe that evolution is going on in the interaction between humans and diseases, then where did they come from ... were they delivered to us by little green men in UFOs? User:AlMac|(talk) 09:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, logically, if there is no such thing as evolution, and life forms spring into being out of nowhere and have a tremendous effect on the course of human events, that must be proof of divine intervention. God's just gotten tired of fire and brimstone. Of course, if there's such a thing as divine intervention, that means that evolution isn't real. That's called having no loose ends. --Black Carrot 23:25, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] physics

what is a pendulum

Presumably, it is a pendulum. To search Wikipedia for articles, type the word into the search box on the left side of your screen. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Energy Conserveation

I know I have asked many questions with this title, but what is gravitational redshift and why doesn't it violae energy conservation? Thanks 216.209.153.167 22:26, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

See gravitational redshift. To be brief and a bit sloppy, the photons are moving from a region of lower gravitational potential to a region with higher potential energy; in order for energy to be conserved, the photons lose energy and are redshifted. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:36, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Put in a very simplistic way, they try to escape the pull and get stretched out in the process. DirkvdM 09:58, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Are Cheeses made the same way as they were a hundred years ago?

(no question)

Do you mean, "Is cheese made from curdled milk?" Yes. Do you mean, "Is cheese made by poor dirty children while the father went out hunting for meat and the mother was out plowing the fields?" No, not really. --Kainaw (talk) 22:57, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
As for production methods, some cheeses are artisanally produced in small batches using traditional techniques but many others are factory mass produced. But they are all still (moldy, acid-filled, bacteria-infected, depending on the style) old milk. Our article is quite good on this. Rmhermen 00:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Note that now, in addition to real cheese, which remains widely available, there is also something called "artificial cheese food product", like the Kraft singles sold in the US. These are made primarily from soybean oil, not milk, so can't legally be called "cheese". StuRat 09:25, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
You beat me to it, but I can still add the link you omitted: processed cheese. I suppose that in the Netherlands, the word 'cheese' (or, rather, 'kaas') can not even be used, because that would still suggest it is cheese. I'm not even sure if it is sold here at all (this is cheese country after all). DirkvdM 10:04, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Yea, I somehow doubt if they would allow such an abomination in any country known for cheese production. StuRat 11:44, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
You are a bit wrong there. There is in fact no soybeans in Kraft singles. Processed cheese is still made of milk. The ingredients for Kraft singles are: "KRAFT SINGLES KRAFT: MILK, WHEY, MILKFAT, MILK PROTEIN CONCENTRATE, SALT, CALCIUM PHOSPHATE, SODIUM CITRATE, WHEY PROTEIN CONCENTRATE, SODIUM PHOSPHATE, SORBIC ACID AS A PRESERVATIVE, APOCAROTENAL (COLOR), ANNATTO (COLOR), ENZYMES, VITAMIN D3, CHEESE CULTURE." Rmhermen 02:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, I remember reading "soybean oil" off a processed cheese ingredients list, perhaps it was one that's "fat free". StuRat 17:27, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Please don't shout. DirkvdM 07:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, that was a cut-n-paste original, not my emphasis. Rmhermen 15:39, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Interestingly, the origin of processed cheese was simply leftover cheese. Kraft got the idea when working in a grocery, where he was bothered by the waste of all the hard bits and scrapings off cheese, as it was sold at the time from big wheels the grocer cut himself. He figured out a way to melt them down and stabilize them chemically to produce processed cheese. - Dharmabum420 23:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Medicine

Many drugs such as atropine and digoxin are isolated from plants. Why are these drugs regulated by the FDA and St John's wort or saw palmetto are not?

If you were cultivating them for profit, they possibly might. I don't think it regulates wildlife. Also regulating the processing (ie. turning the plants into the drugs) is more enforcable than regulating the plants themselves. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 23:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)


The answer is straightforward and involves the legal difference between drugs and dietary supplements. A drug makes a claim of therapeutic efficacy and is subject to the requirements of the FDA for proof of safety and efficacy. A dietary supplement is subject to (relatively) much lower standards of purity and truthful labeling, and cannot make claims of therapeutic efficacy. A manufacturer who wants to market a substance can decide which type of marketing is likely to be most profitable. This depends on many factors, such as the obtainability of patent protection and the likelihood that a demonstration of therapeutic efficacy would increase the sales and allow a higher price. Typically the manufacturer will opt for dietary supplement status if the substance is not patentable (like a raw plant extract) or he has no confidence that efficacy will be demonstrable by affordable clinical trials. Digoxin is actually a molecule copied from the active ingredient in foxglove but is not identical to the old digitalis preparations. I think atropine is the manufactured active ingredient of belladonna, but the pharmaceutical product has not been extracted from plants for many decades. I think there was a chemotherapy agent (taxol) that was actually extracted from plants a decade or so ago, but that is becoming less and less common.

Note the definitions have nothing to do with "natural" versus synthetic, or purified from plants versus invented, as there are plenty of examples of prescription drugs obtained from living sources and plenty of examples of dietary supplements that are synthesized in factories (e.g., most vitamins). A couple of excellent examples that show that the distinction has nothing to do with the biological nature or properties of the substances are the pairs of melatonin and pitressin, and dehydroepiandrosterone and hydrocortisone. The first pair are small protein hormones, secreted by the pineal gland and posterior pituitary gland respectively. The second pair are steroid hormones produced by the adrenal glands. All four have therapeutic uses. The first item of each pair is classified and marketed as a dietary supplement while the second of each pair is a drug.

Obviously many manufacturers market their dietary supplements with hype that skates as close to the edge of the law as possible, implying that their product will fix whatever ails you while including a little message that "this product is not intended for the treatment of any disease". alteripse 00:48, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

see also Codex Alimentarius. It's not just Europe. Due to international treaties, may effect USA as well. GangofOne 11:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 16

[edit] Mutation rate of Y chromosome?

Hi wikiguys. I thought this was going to be a question-posting page but it's headed "comment". It's a question!

I've read both the "Y chromosome" article and the "genetic genealogy" article, and they didn't answer the question I was pondering about. I know we males get our Y from our dads and pass it to our sons (with a little bit of crossing-over at the tip during meiosis?), and I gather there are some variations in the Y but it mutates slowly enough so that, eg, one should be able to identify all of Tom Jefferson's male descendants (or perhaps they could be descendants of his brothers or cousins?). But *how* slowly does it mutate (on average of course)? How big a group of us would there most likely be with exactly the same set of base-pairs on the Y as I have - back to the great-to-the-nth-grandfather and out to the nth cousins, where n is what (or in what range)?

I'd quite like a personal answer to this, but the main reason I'm asking is so a bit more detail could be put into the exising entries. I find them interesting but provokingly vague at the moment.

--131.181.251.66 02:00, 16 January 2006 (UTC) John Pyke Brisbane Australia

This is an area of much research and some controversy. Many of the commercial genetic genealogy sites such as this one [68] assume a typical mutation rate estimate for each marker gene Y chromosome of about 1 in 500 generations (or 0.2%. On the other hand, cutting edge research on microsatellite mutation rates is producing different answers. See [69] for a more complicated and current discussion of the variation rates. These authors describe nearly a 10-fold difference in the rates produced by different estimates, suggesting that the results from some of the commercial public market labs are using some estimates that may need to be revised. alteripse 02:29, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

some random thoughts. When genealogists discuss Y-chromosomal DNA testing, they are in general not talking about simple point mutations (though, outside the genealogical time frame, they do discuss SNPs), but short-tandem repeat polymorphisms. The rate at which these occur is hotly debated [70] but is on the order of 0.002-0.004 or 0.2%-0.4%. - once per 125 or 250 generations. Another estimate given here is 6.9×10-4 per 25 years. You might also find this comparison with chimpanzees interesting. As you're probably aware, the Jefferson family's Y chromosome has been studied, and some of Thomas Jefferson's more putative male descendants share it<g>. - Nunh-huh 02:30, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks guys - all I wanted to know and possibly more. [Alteripse, do you spend all your time answering queries on this page?] I was really interested in an answer at an order-of-magnitude level, so regardless of doubts about whether the answer is 100 or 500 generations, it's clearly more than 10 or 20 (so if every male sharing the same Y had the same surname, there'd be less surnames than there are, cos surnames only go back 15-20 generations I guess). And Nunh-huh, yes, the query was inspired by watching a doco on Jefferson and Sally Hemings. I gather that some of Hemings's descendants who thought they were Jeffersons had their suspicion confirmed (as much as it can be - they could be descended from TJ's 3rd cousin if he was lurking around Montecello), while others found out they were clearly not descended from him?

--131.181.251.66 05:17, 18 January 2006 (UTC) JP

Yes, specifically, a descendant of Eston Hemings matched the Jefferson family Y haplotype, while descendants of Thomas Woodson did not. (Both Eston and Thomas were said to be Sally Heming's sons.) None of them matched the Carr family haplotype. (Peter & Samuel Carr were children of Thomas Jefferson's sister, and were the fathers named in some people's alternative explanations of Sally Heming's pregnancies. ) - Nunh-huh 07:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cell biology

What's the difference between synaptic and neurocrine cells?


And Grey's Anatomy says that cells tend to have a negative charge, and that's why there is a bit of shace between them. Ahy do they have a negative charge?

Many proteins at the surface of cells are glycosylated and have negatively charged sugars such as sialic acid (do not let the chemical diagram fool you, the carboxyl group ionizes to create a negative charge on the sugar). In general, there is some space between cells unless there are specific cell adhesion molecules that hold them tightly together.
Wikipedia does not have an entry for neurocrine. Neurocrine cells can be thought of as a subset of neuroendocrine cells. In the endocrine system the focus is usually on hormones that are distributed to target cells by the blood. However, there are paracrine substances that can act on local target cells without going through the blood stream. Similarly, there are neuron-like cells that release signaling molecules such as neuropeptides or neurotransmitters so as to act on nearby cells in a paracrine fashion. This differs from synaptic signals in that synaptic signals are generally constrained to an anatomically small region of contact (synaptic space of "cleft") between the neuron that releases the signalling molecule and the target cell that responds to the signaling molecule. However, a clear distinction between "synaptic" and "neurocrine" cells can be hard to make. A single cell can release multiple kinds of signalling molecules, some of which are restricted to synapses and some of which are not. The term "neurocrine cell" is probably used mostly by endocrinologists who deal with neuron-like cells that are located in target tissues like those of the gastrointestinal tract and that do not release their signalling molecules at synapses. --JWSchmidt 14:51, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


  • One more thing, some cells in the hypothalamus actually synaptically release neurohormones directly into the bloodstream via the anterior pituitary. Which means that they can function as both enocrine cells and neurons. You also asked about cells having a negative charge. The inside of neurons is negatively charged relative to the outside, this is what is called a membrane potential and is used to generate electrical signals to communicate with other neurons. Nrets 15:58, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] thank you

I just wanted to give you a big thank you; this is the coolest thing I've ever seen, -signed rude cell biology guy.

Nothing says "thank you" better than cold hard cash. =P —Keenan Pepper 03:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Nah, you can give back by editing and donating your time, too. Thank you in return for using Wikipedia! --AySz88^-^ 05:27, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Camera lens aperture

Would a digital SLR camera, with a bigger diameter lens than, say, my little cannon elph digital camera be able to take better indoor pictures without a flash? In other words, if I try and take pictures inside without a flash (even in a well lit room) they are either blurry (too long an exposure) or very grainy (larger "ISO"). My question is, would a bigger lens be able to gather more light in a briefer amount of time, and therefore allow me to be able to decrease the length of the exposure without having to resort to higher ISO's, or is the aperture set somewhere else and this has nothing to do with the diameter of the lens? Burleigh 04:02, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

It's not the absolute diameter that matters, but the focal ratio or f-number. This expresses the lens diameter as a fraction of its focal length. If you have an f/2 lens, say, that means the diameter is 1/2 the focal length, and it will gather twice as much light as an f/2.8 lens, 4 times as much as an f/4 lens -- remember that the area varies as the square as the diameter. (In brighter light you don't need the full diameter of the lens, so the lens may be "stopped down" to f/8 or or f/16 or whatever in order to improve the depth of field. When I say an f/2 lens I am referring to the full diameter of the lens, which corresponds to the lowest f-number you can set the aperture to.)
I am assuming that the "ISO" number you refer to is the equivalent to film speed and that for purposes of comparing lenses we are treating it as equal in the two cameras. Being a film-photography snob myself, I have no experience with comparing digital cameras.
--Anonymous, 05:50 UTC, January 16, 2006.
Anonymous is correct, but there's another issue; the size of the image sensor. Digital SLR's have bigger image sensors than your compact, and consequently most can be used at much higher ISO settings than a digital compact can without picture noise becoming a problem. One further issue to keep in mind is the presence of optical image stabilisers; a few compacts have them (though probably not your Elph), the Minolta digital SLR's have them built in, and you can buy (expensive but better) stabilised lenses for Canon and Nikon digital SLR's. If you're prepared to lug an SLR around, you will almost certainly get technically better pictures. --Robert Merkel 09:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Those stabilisers counteract camera movement such as a shaking hand, not movement of the subject, such as people getting blurred when photographing indoors. A lower f number (greater aperture) will indeed make better use of the size of the lens, but it also makes the depth of field smaller, meaning that a smaller distance range will be in focus. Anything before and behind that will get more blurred as you increase the aperture to let in more light. So that's another trade-off.
Another aspect is how well the camera is built. This is something Zeiss is famed for. Their cameras are hand-built. I don't know why this is, but somehow this is said to be part of the cause for the quality of the cameras (or, rather, the lenses). Apparently, with a Zeiss, you don't need a flash indoors, which is a great improvement in two ways. The photos are much better (flash gives very nasty unnatural light unless you use professional flash, which is also cumbersome to use) and you don't attract attention,meaning you can take photos without people being aware of it, which results in more natural appearances. Also, the cameras themselves are very inconspicuous. They look very cheap (but rest assured, they aren't). Which has the advantage that they're less prone to theft. They've got a few digital models out, too, now. DirkvdM 10:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks! So one more question, how is the ISO implemented in the digital cameras? Does it simply take in a dim image and then artificially amplify the brightness and contrast, which is why the images look noisy, or is there more to this? Burleigh 15:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, digital cameras have a base ISO rating for their imaging chip. When the ISO is increased above this, the camera amplifies the signal from the chip to simulate a higher ISO. The amplification not only increases the signal strength, but also increases any noise received from the sensor. See DPReview glossary entry on ISO for a more detailed description. --GraemeL (talk) 16:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Penicillin Allergy and Gorgonzola / Blue Cheese

Can an individual who is allergic to Penicillin have an allergic reaction if they eat Gorgonzola or Blue Cheese? Thanks.

I'm not sure. As far as my knowledge entails, the two moulds are different, therefore cause allergic reactions in different people. But, just to be sure, check with an allergist; they have a better understanding of this matter. --JB Adder | Talk 05:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
It would be a bad thing if those cheeses contained antibiotics, because that would help the rise of resistant bacteria. DirkvdM 10:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
A good point. Also, if they did contain viable amounts of antibiotic, it seems likely that at some time the discovery that blue cheese cured some serious illnesses would have been made. In localities where it was made, many people would have consumed it every day. Notinasnaid 11:11, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the point of the question is that (since penicillin was discovered because it was produced by a mold) whether the blue mold that is included in the cheeses might contain enough natural penicillin to activate an allergy. The answer is no. I hate to say that there has never been a reported case (always a hazardous claim, even though the case may not have accurately proven cause and effect) but I am certain that if cross-reaction to mold were a clearly demonstrated phenomenon, it would be included in the avoidance instructions allergists give when someone is allergic to penicillin. Penicillin allergy is relatively common and certain other rare cross-reactions are well known to most doctors. alteripse 13:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


I am allergic to penicillin and have eaten lots of blue cheese with no noticable effect. -- Mwalcoff 03:36, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] tank and self propeller howitzer

what a different betwen tank and self proppeler howitzer?


Primarily, the angle they shoot at. A tank shoots more-or-less directly at the target, whereas a howitzer is an artillery piece and shoots up, using indirect fire so that the shell falls down onto the target from above. Because of the difference in the way they attack, tanks are generally more heavilly armoured and have additional weaponry (i.e. a machine gun), since they are more likely to engage in direct combat, where howitzers have longer gun barrels, to assist with shooting the long distances. Refer to our tank and howitzer articles for all your nation-invading needs. ByeByeBaby 05:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
The two are more similiar in appearance than in any other factors. The basic design parameters of tanks and self propelled howitzers are entirely different. The howitzer really only has as much armor as is necessary to protect from stray counterbattery shrapnel -- as tanklike as the M109A6 looks, it's actually got armor that you could puncture with a 30mm cannon. The M110 doesn't even have a turret or any protection for its gunners, it's essentially a gun on a chassis. They're not meant to engage the enemy at all, only to shoot and move. Their very battlefield function is far different, and to say that it boils down to the angle of fire is very misleading. Night Gyr 07:08, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PysX (PPU) Connectivity

I've been reading up on the new PPUs that are scheduled to come out soon. I can't find information that says how the PPU will connect to a computer.

I found a picture of a PPU (card?) and it was mentioned that it would have support for the PCI-E slot (probably among others).

Is this (card?) supposed to be used in place of a regular video card, or are the video card and PPU card supposed to both be connected at once? If they're both supposed to be in at once, would I be able to use both my current PCI-E video card and the PPU together on my current SLI motherboard? Flea110 05:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

This article said it's initially coming as a PCI card, with PCI-E to follow shortly. It's designed to be an adjunct to a video card, not a replacement. If this product is successful, however, it will be tempting for the video card manufacturers to release integrated units and this separate card will go the way of 3D-only video cards like the early Voodoo chips. --Robert Merkel 19:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PMR 446 two way radio use

Hi,

I have a set of UK PMR446 two way radios. I will be travelling to the USA soon and I was hoping to use the radios as a baby monitoring system while in the Hotel.

I understand that the use of radios with the 446 mhz frequency are illegal in the US but I was wondering if by only using them as a baby monitor, would I be in trouble.

Hopefully you can help me.

Many thanks,


Emmet Pullan

I don't know the background to this, but one reason particular radio equipment is illegal is because it can or does interfere with other radios. (Not always, but it is a possibility). So, whether you use it as a baby monitor or not, maybe it would interfere with some other radio system in use in the hotel, by the police, or someone else. Given that, whatever the ethics, it might be more likely that you are caught than you imagine. Notinasnaid 11:38, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
444-450MHz is used by FM (radio) repeaters. --Kainaw (talk) 22:01, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] astronomy

the letters au in astronomy mean what?

Try searching for "au" in the search box to the left and see what turns up. --Robert Merkel 12:07, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Astronomical units, a unit of distance based on the mean radius of Earth's orbit around the Sun. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 19:53, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm surprised no one gave this a "do your own homework"

[edit] How easy is it for an adult to learn to ride a bicycle?

Not really sure if this is a science question, but anyway. Assuming that they never learnt as a child, how easy would it be for an adult in their 30s to learn to ride a bicycle? Are they likely to be more co-ordinated than a small child, and therefore to learn more easily, or are they likely to learn more slowly (in the same way that older people have more trouble learning to drive)? And a related question - can one buy stabilisers for an adult-sized bike (assuming that you're not too self-conscious to be seen using them)? --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 12:20, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I would think adults would learn more slowly than a child who was old enough to learn. Training wheels, however, are really only useful for small children who are too young to learn to ride without them. They would only delay an adult from learning how to balance properly, as well as making for a rather humiliating experience. StuRat 12:29, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
For adults, there are pros and cons. Pros: Better fine motor control and coordination; potentially longer attention span for the task. Cons: Higher center of gravity; more difficult to learn new physical tasks in general; slower healing if you fall off. There's no reason why an otherwise healthy thirty-year-old can't learn to ride a bicycle, but achieving comfort and proficiency will probably take longer.
It may also depend on your patience/motivation and whether you've done other things that develop balance like skiing, rollerblading, or horse riding (though I can report that you have some key body skills to unlearn in switching between riding and cycling, or you tend to fall off). Also: I think children require someone to help them learn (e.g. to hold the bike upright during practice). So I think it would be a difficult thing to learn in a solitary situation. One last thing if you are completely new: falling onto roads and pavements hurts, but it's very hard to ride on really soft ground. Try and find something between (e.g. a firm lawn, not wet but not baked solid). Notinasnaid 13:43, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Geez, I still have terrifying recalls of learning when I was a kid! I googled around and found that there are community programs for adults. You cannot do this alone! --Zeizmic 14:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Why would training wheels "delay an adult from learning how to balance properly"? Their entire purpose is to help people learn balance. Black Carrot 15:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
No, the purpose of training wheels is to allow children too young to balance on a bicycle to ride one without falling over. You could leave training wheels on your whole life and would never begin to learn how to balance a bicycle without them until after they were removed. 15:56, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
MacBike tourist rental bikes in Amsterdam are painted a conspicuous yellow. Amsterdammers have learned to give these a wiiiiide berth. :) I don't know where you're from, but in some cities, where bikes are not common, cycling can be very life-threatening for an experienced biker. Let alone for a novice. Best go to some suburb. Or find a smooth and solid (non-bitumen) forest lane. DirkvdM 19:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I would assume it would be easier because adults are stronger and would be more likely able to generate the force needed to propel the bicycle to a stable speed. But that could vary for someone very out of shape. Now adults are generally more easily embarrassed and therefore less likely to accept help and maybe less persistent in trying again, so maybe it would take longer in the end. Kids tend not to be swayed by failure and keep trying over and over until they are successful, especially for something exciting like riding a bike. - Taxman Talk 23:45, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

A couple of misconceptions in the above: (1) A higher center of gravity makes it easier to balance a bicycle, not harder (because falling takes longer, so you have more time to react and get back in balance: the same principle makes it easier to balance a broom on your hand than a pencil). (2) There's no difficulty in generating "the force needed to propel the bicycle to a stable speed". Bikes are quite stable at walking pace. Gdr 19:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, I just learned to ride a bike at the grand old age of 17, and it's taken me hardly any time at all. If you want, get a friend or someone you trust to push you along until you get the general gist of it and know how to balance. Get advice from them too. And then... just get on and start pedalling, and it's all downhill from there. In a good way. Incidentally, I think ice-skating helps. --Sum0 23:30, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How to change static IP address?

Is it possible? Whenever I connect to my aDSL provider, I get a new IP, yet I also have some static IP, any way to change this also? Thank you 83.5.252.245 17:43, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

What are you trying to accomplish? —Keenan Pepper 18:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
My guess would be vandalism. I love when they ask politly for advice on vandalizing the website they're asking on, it's so cute —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.167.86.250 (talk • contribs).
I think he needs this excellent hacker tool! Tzarius 23:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand. So do you have static IP and want dynamic IP or do you have synamic IP and want a static one? – b_jonas 22:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] cpu

which is the worst quality out of the following CPU's: Intel dual core CPU, intel prescott CPU, AMD athlon CPU, AMS semprom CPU or 64bit CPU. please explain in detail if possible

Athlon is a long line of processors spanning many years. "64bit" is not even a specific brand of processor. There is no way to compare these things because they refer to unrelated aspects of a processor. —Keenan Pepper 18:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Please do not post multiple questions about the same subject. This list makes no sense, it's like comparing apples, oranges, Granny Smiths, and juicy things. —Keenan Pepper 18:11, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seriously.

As a 14-year-old white male, living in England, how likely am I to die of bird flu? Kid Apathy 18:20, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

At the moment, the odds are pretty much nonexistent. But people are mostly worried that the bird flu will mutate into something more pernicious in humans, and since that is currently primarily a hypothetical question exactly what the risk is to anyone is somewhat unknown and up in the air. --Fastfission 18:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't want to die. Kid Apathy 18:28, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
You might want to read bird flu. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:29, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, I suppose "Kid Apathy" is a misnomer, then? Anyway, your odds of dying in a much more mundane manner are still much higher than the perhaps-pandemic-of-the-month in most cases. --Fastfission 18:31, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
  • If this current form of avian flu reaches England, there are some questions that will become relevant: do you drink bird blood or play with bird excrement? --JWSchmidt 18:31, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
...no... Kid Apathy 18:33, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

How frightened are you of "last year's" nemesis: mad cow disease? Based on statistics to date, you are a 10,000 times more likely to die of a car accident, at least a hundred times more likely to die of a terrorist attack, and 10 times more likely to die of mad cow disease than bird flu. It is amazing, isn't it, how journalistic coverage warps our risk estimations (not just yours, mine too)? alteripse 18:33, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I posted this somewhere else- how true is it?

Scientists think that maybe lots of people have had bird flu, but haven't shown major symptoms.

No-one apparently realises that if that were the case, bird flu is not nearly as strong as they're making out to be.

Anyway, the only cases covered by the media would be ones where the ill people died. And they probably had something wrong with them anyway, like immunological disorders or something. That may sound extremely cruel, but I have no idea how else to phrase it :P

Just now on the news, they were talking about it but only how it'd affect chicken farms. So it can't be that bad.

Vitriol 18:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

There's a chance, but if I were you I'd concentrate on looking both ways when you cross the road rather than watching chickens and hoping they don't sneeze (Yes, I know infected chickens don't sneeze...) smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 18:37, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I have another question. Would you like to hear it? Vitriol 18:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

There will be another pandemic, just a matter of time. Whether it will come from bird flu I don't know. Possibly the worst pandemic ever was spanish flu. That killed 50 to 100 million people world wide. That's about 5% of the then world population. But that was helped by the appalling situation after WWI and medicine has improved significantly since. So if you experience a pandemic in your lifetime, there'll probably be at least a 99% chance you'll survive. And if you're young and fit that will also greatly increase your chances. In the Netherlands about 1000 people per year die of car accidents. On a population of about 15 moillion that means a chance of death by car of about 0.5%. But the age thing is reversed here. It's especially young people who die of car accidents. The major death causes of people under 40 were at the end of the 19th century child mortality, death of the mother at birth, war and epidemics (wasn't there a fifth cause?. The first two are eliminated and the third largely (for Europeans at least). Epidemics are still a sword of Damocles hanging over our heads, but they're not a clear and present danger (yet). Cars are. They're the big killers of our time.
Alteripse, are you suggesting that terrorist attacks are 1/100 as dangerous as cars? You've got to be joking. Cars have killed 25 million people in the last 50 years or so. Surely, terrorism hasn't killed 250,000 people in the same timespan. And dont' give me that crap about terrorism being on the rise. Though maybe in England and Spain the death toll has been relatively higher (and I am referring to the IRA and ETA). DirkvdM 20:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
No argument about cars vs everything else. I made up the numbers, but I think that more people have been killed in the UK by terrorists in the last couple of decades than by mad cow disease and bird flu put together. My point was simply that our brains don't do accurate weighing of risks that vary by more than an order of magnitude in likelihood or that hold disparate cultural dreadfulness values.alteripse 20:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

With a quote from South Park:

  • Randy: Listen to me Stanley. I have SARS. There's only a 98% percent chance that I will live.
  • Stan: No Dad, No!
  • Randy: Listen Stan! Sars is destroying our people. The Native americans put it in the blankets they gave us. Soon there will be only 98% of us left.

--helohe (talk) 20:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

alteripse- You made up those numbers? That's a pretty horrible thing to do on the reference desk, especially if you claim it's "based on statistics to date". 69.154.179.63 00:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
The specific odds for the other risks were not the requested piece of information; I believe the relative magnitudes to be reasonably close within an order of magnitude (other than my underestimation of the car deaths); and adjusting them doesn't change the main point of my answer, as explained above. Sorry if I disillusioned you; I believe in admitting it if someone correctly points out I erred. alteripse 02:41, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The current risk is important, but so is the potential risk. If we only took preventative actions against things which have already killed millions of people, we would suffer from massive deaths every year from disease. Some apparent threats, like Mad Cow Disease, never materialized, probably due to the corrective actions we took, like stopping the practice of killing sick cows, grinding them up, and feeding them to healthy cows (in their grain). Other diseases which were not widespread at the time of the first warnings, like AIDS in the early 1980's, have grown to the point where they do kill millions every year. So, such warnings are not silly, but should be taken seriously. StuRat 15:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The thing about bird flu is not catching it, but the sheer horror of trying to eat Hainanese chicken rice with frozen chicken imported from Brazil....which tastes horrible. When Malaysia caught it in 2004, Singapore cut off all imports for a while, since I was used to fresh chicken (ie. only hours away) from the kampung. Bird flu sucks because it affects food, not merely your health. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 18:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Book about Cryptography

Whats the Book about Cryptography? I once heard "Applied Cryptography by Bruce Schneier" is a good one. But is there any book that could be called The Book? --helohe (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I think these four books are the standard works:

  • Bruce Schneier, Applied Cryptography, 2nd edition, Wiley, 1996, ISBN 0471117099.
  • A. J. Menezes, P. C. van Oorschot, and S. A. Vanstone, Handbook of Applied Cryptography ISBN 0849385237.
  • Stinson, Douglas R., * Cryptography: Theory and Practice, CRC Press, 1995.
  • Stallings, William, Cryptography and Network Security (3rd Ed.), Prentice Hall, 2003.

Cheers, —Ruud 20:33, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I will buy one of them. -- helohe (talk) 21:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
If you are looking for a book that is more about history and fun stories, you can look at Simon Singh's The Code Book. It is next to useless for learning how modern cryptography works, but it is great for understanding where modern cryptography came from. --Kainaw (talk) 21:47, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
  • If you need any further guidance, I suggest you talk to User:Matt Crypto our resident cryptography nut expert ;) . - Mgm|(talk) 08:41, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The Codebreakers : The Comprehensive History of Secret Communication from Ancient Times to the Internet by David Kahn -- GangofOne 02:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Back when I was going to church, I was invited to CES Education Week by a friend, and went to the BYU bookstore. There, I found a nifty little handbook titled Cryptography: A Very Short Introduction. It was a very good book on cryptography, at least I thought so, and got me going on the subject. Cernen Xanthine Katrena 11:13, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How do I clean a duvet? (Not the cover, the actual duvet).

They wouldn't take them in a dry cleaners, would they? --bodnotbod 20:22, 16 January 2006 (UTC) Never mind. It's solved. --bodnotbod 21:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia, I am your father

Does that make any sense?

I think we need a Philosophy reference desk. —Ruud 21:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Energy

Is ocean wave energy classified as potential or kinetic energy and why?

Read the top of the article: Do your own homework. If you really need help, read the articles on kinetic energy and potential energy. --Kainaw (talk) 21:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 17

[edit] Fleems

Is there really such thing as a 'fleem' or a 'microfleem'? Black Carrot 01:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Not in modern English, but 'to fleme' means to chase away. --James S. 03:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

That sounds like a nonsense term used in IQ tests like so: "If all fleems are dweebs, are all dweebs also fleems ?" StuRat 15:29, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I got them from Dilbert comics. I'm wondering whether they're real, or just made up for the purpose of the joke. Black Carrot 20:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
@ microfleem reminds me to a microfilm. – b_jonas 22:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Could be a hoax, but http://www.earlytech.com/common/show_item.phtml?Id=1295001497 includes a photo of an 18th century blood letting instrument identified as a fleem. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:59, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talismin

Is there a name/classification for animals that have tails? Specifically vertebrate animals where the spine continues into a tail. I am uncertain whether this class would be restricted to mammals. Thank you for your assistance!

Caudate mammals means tailed mammals. Understand this is merely an adjective, not a taxonomic classification. alteripse 02:44, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if this fits in with official terminology, but all mammals have tails. Ours are just too short to come out (well, mine is anyway :) ). See tailbone. DirkvdM 07:57, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hosting a web server

I'm interested in hosting a web server from my (Linux) computer. I have Apache, but I don't have a domain name. Do I need a "static IP address" for that? When I asked 5-6 years ago, people said that starting a web server was really easy, but Verizon says that a static IP would be another $50 a month. What's the cheapest way to run a webserver from my computer? Is it true that some ISPs won't let you run web servers even if you've paid for the bandwidth? -- Creidieki 02:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

You can also use some dynamic DNS service like no-ip.com (which a friend of mine uses). Yes, some ISPs do filter port 80; if that's the case, you can still run the webserver in an alternate port, but people would then need to remember that port (or you could use a redirector service). You need a real IP address; if you are behind some sort of NAT, it's harder or even impossible. --cesarb 03:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, no-ip.com is nice. I use it for ssh and stuff. —Keenan Pepper 03:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What is the most chemically reactive metal?

—The preceding unsigned header was added by 24.36.108.53 (talk • contribs) .

  • Should be lithium I guess, though it's been ages since I did any chemistry. deeptrivia (talk) 03:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually it's caesium or the unstable francium. The heavier alkali metals ionize more readily. —Keenan Pepper 03:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Are you asking for the greatest number of different compounds formed, reaction rate in air/water/other, number of different stable oxidation states, catalytic properties, or something else? --James S. 03:45, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Sodium is also quite reactive: [71] StuRat 15:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bulls are color blind, then why are they furious about red?

i've heard that bulls are color blind, and still they chase red things. why? why ? why?

Well, the article on bull fighting agrees with you about the color blindness: The red colour of the cape is a matter of tradition, as bulls are actually colour blind. The article may mention this as I only skimmed through it and happened to find that bit. Dismas|(talk) 04:51, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
The red cape used in bullfighting is merely a tradition for the benefit of human audiences (the majority of whom can distinguish between colours) - the bull is enraged by the fact that people have been chasing it round the ring, sticking things in it, and its attention is drawn to the movement of the large piece of cloth being waved in front of its eyes; it has no way of knowing that it's red. - IMSoP 04:52, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Right: Bulls don't chase red things. Not outside of old Disney cartoons anyway. --BluePlatypus 09:49, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
They wouldn't even chase a red platypus, even if it pretends to be blue. DirkvdM 20:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
But that probably has more to do with the lethal characteristics of the platypus in general. Many dogs have died by making the mistake of chasing a platypus. --BluePlatypus 20:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AC or DC current? which is more dangerous and why?

which is more dangerous Alternate current or the direct one? i knew that but forgot?

  • It really depends on how high that current is, but if it's anything above a few milli Amps, it's pretty much deadly anyway. - Mgm|(talk) 08:44, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
In my experience, whoever wants you to be careful around a particular type of electricity says that that type is the most dangerous. AC is capable of killing you quickly by interfering with your heart action. DC is capable of paralyzing your muscles so you can't get away from the current and it has more time to injure you. Higher voltages are dangerous because the electricity can overcome electrical resistance and give you a shock. Lower voltages are dangerous (outside of low-power applications) because a larger current is required to achieve the same power and therefore there is a greater risk of overheating and fire in case of damaged wiring or a bad connection. Take your pick. --Anonymous, 8:43 UTC, January 17, 2006.
Reputedly, Thomas Edison, who backed direct current hated George Westinghouse, who liked alternating current, so he had some of the scientists in his company kill animals with alternating current to prove how dangerous it was. However, this backfired when New York state was so amazed by this idea, they used alternating current to power electric chairs! smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 16:42, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • This is a bit twisted; Edison liked the idea of AC being used for executing condemned prisoners, for the same reason as the animal demonstrations. He not only suggested that AC be used for this purpose (subtext: and only for this purpose), he even suggested a new term for it: "westinghousing". --Anon, 00:55 UTC, January 18.
In theory, DC is supposed to be the more dangerous. However, the situations where people are most often injured by an electric shock are AC: e.g. christmas lights, or a plug in the bathroom, or stealing metal from high-voltage wires or transformators. This has to do with that AC can be more easily transformed and so it's more suitable for use in housholds, while DC is used in portable devices with a much lower voltage. (However, do take care with car batteries. Even though their voltage is only around 12V, their resistance is very low so you can get injured easily if you mess with one.) – b_jonas 22:00, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brown's Note

What is Brown's note? are the myths about it really true? what are its effects on human body when exposed to it? --Muhammad Hamza 04:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

See Brown note. -- Rick Block (talk) 05:04, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Submarine nucular reactor weight

I have searched all or most of the articles on nuclear submarines and thier reactors and have not been able to find the weight of the reactor. Maybe I over looked it but I basically want to know what is the wirght of a submarine nuclear reactor?--68.120.71.145 05:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

This would be hard to find because I think it would be classified, as are most data regarding nuclear submarines.

[edit] plants

can plants grow in sand?

Yes, but it's difficult without a supplementary source of nutrients; if plants do gain a foothold the topsoil will gradually be transformed into something more hospitable. Many grasses grow on coastal sand dunes. See the sand dune article. --Robert Merkel 06:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
You can also find Rosa Rugosa, Artemisia (not sure of the species, there are many), and Lathyrus odoratus (sweet peas, not the edible kind though) growing in sand dunes in the N.E. U.S. I've seen evergreen shrubs growing in dunes as well but I don't know enough to tell you what genus. I can tell you that they are painful to fall into. Jasongetsdown 22:29, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Where can I get ethane clathrate?

I want to get a small amount of methane clathrate to play around with. Where can I get it and how much does it cost? —Keenan Pepper 06:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

From the description here, it looks like the stuff's not commercially viable yet - though it may soon be. A quick search on a few chemical supply stores doesnt give any hits, which does back up the statement. GeeJo (t) (c) •19:45, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Free Subscription of Scientific Journals/Magazines

Dear Sir, I want to know about the free subscription for scientific journnals/magazines according that I would like to subscribg other journnals for our Institute.

Thanking you

Bankar

  • As far as I know a subscription to a scientific journal or magazine is quite expensive. Why did you think you could subscribe for free? - Mgm|(talk) 08:47, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • So long as you not make a habit of this, note that some major bookstore chains have both:
    • A coffee shop where you can have soup and sandwiches in the middle of your shopping,
    • All sorts of magazines including Scientific Journals like Scientific American.
  • So, go to one of those places, browse, pick up a handful of publications, go to the coffee shop and read some of your selection, while eating what they have to offer (more expensive than a restaurant, but not by much), then change your mind about what you are going to buy and take with you.

User:AlMac|(talk) 09:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I have a suspicion he does not have a nearby Barnes & Noble. I am guessing that he is asking about reduced rate or free subscriptions for developing world institutions who cannot afford the western prices for scientific and technical journals. The "institutional price" for one of these can exceed a thousand dollars a year. He will need to contact the publishers directly for the journals he is interested in; the contact information is usually available at the publishers' websites. An alternative is that many American libraries are willing to ship duplicate journals to third world libraries, but you don't always get the latest issue when published. A third suggestion is contacting some of the university library associations for suggestions. This one has a mailing list, which might be good place to enquire. Do we have any university librarians who read this and can provide suggestions? alteripse 12:41, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

There are some free publications, like NASA Tech Briefs, which are free to promote NASA funding by gaining publicity. Either we lack an article on that magazine, or I just failed to find it. Here is the subscription site: [72]. StuRat 14:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I added a stub for NASA Tech Briefs, please expand. StuRat 21:51, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

If you are a student, or represent a placea of education, you might be able to get some scientific magazines free or very cheap. Try New Scientist - it used to do that back when I was in school (though they were chiselling each edition on stone tablets then). DJ Clayworth 16:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I have seen something here http://www.freetrademagazinesource.com/8/categories.aspx but havent reviewed it. helohe (talk) 19:13, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The Dutch magazine Intermediair is free for students during the last year of their study and the year after they graduate. But it's no longer as scientific as it used to be and anyway it's in Dutch. Something similar might exist in Anglophone countries, though. But then you'd have to get them to your country (which I guess is India). Ok, not such a great idea after all. Sorry. DirkvdM 20:13, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


If you are interested in recent publications that you can read online you could also check out Arxiv (its free). helohe (talk) 21:21, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Likewise, http://plos.org/ Public Library of Science free web peer reviewed journals GangofOne 23:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Most major science journals are beginning to make scientific articles older than 6 months available for free through their websites. While not all, journals do this, it is becoming a major trend. Nrets 04:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] multiple disorders with autism

where can i find information about multiple disorders with autism? eg. a person might be blind and autistic. In that case how to go about him/her? is there any chance of improvement? any general information? any therapy available?

Which part: the blindness or the autism? If it's autism, there is an interesting quote in autism: many autistic children and adults who are able to communicate (at least in writing) are opposed to attempts to cure their conditions, and see such conditions as part of who they are. Notinasnaid 09:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

i am interested in specificly blindness + autismadityaa1

Again: which part do you want to "improve"? Blindness or autism? And what would you consider an improvement? Notinasnaid 11:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The autism. but the method or therapy should be modified keeping the blindness in mind. i was not able to find such specific method.in a specific case, the patient is not able to communicate per se. although sporadic usage of sign language(tought previously )is noted. adityaa1 11:23 17 Jan 06 (IST)

Thank you for clarifying the framework of the question. Notinasnaid 18:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] what is xml?

(No question)

What is xml? Good question I think. enochlau (talk) 10:41, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bandwidth monitor software

At present, I am using an Internet connection which is not unlimited. I pay by the number of MegaBytes used. Is there any free software available in the web that will tell how many MegaBytes I have used?

You would be slowing down your connection with monitoring. When we had that, the company had a link that would show the tally. I hated it. Thank goodness, competition forced them to be unlimited. --Zeizmic 12:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


I would think you could monitor your end (number of bits sent and received) without slowing down the connection. Think of it as a pipe delivering water and another pipe sending water. If you put something in the pipes themselves to measure the water, it would indeed slow down the water in the pipe. If you measured the amount after it leaves the pipe or before it enters the pipe, that shouldn't slow down how fast it moves inside the pipe, however. StuRat 14:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
While it's not free, DU Meter it does have a 30-day trial period, and I used it, bought it, and have always been more than happy with it. It monitors your instant connection speed, as well as totals (per day/week/month/year), and you can tell it to alert you when you've reached a certain number of MB per week, for instance. — QuantumEleven | (talk) 15:55, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
With my ISP, I can log in on their website and see how much I've used, so you might want to check if your ISP does something similar. --Sum0 23:12, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How to remove fine scratches from plastic eye glasses?

Is there an easy inexpensive effective way to remove fine scratches from my plastic prescription eye glasses?

I would think filling in the scratches with a clear acrylic resin would be the way to go. I imagine an eyeglass store would carry such a product. StuRat 14:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Did you happen to clean them with paper tissues? Don't in the future. Those are most likely the cause of the scratches. - 131.211.210.11 09:47, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chimps? Yes/no?

Are Bonobos and Chimps actually the same species? They do look very much alike--205.188.116.74 16:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

There was actually something about this in The Times yesterday; they belong to the Chimpanzee family, but they aren't what we commonly refer to as chimps. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 16:36, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

There are two species in the chimpanzee genus, the Common Chimpanzee, Pan troglodytes, and the Bonobo or Pygmy Chimpanzee, Pan paniscus. Wikipedia's articles do a good job of explaining the difference. (Note: there is no "chimpanzee family": chimps are in the same family as humans, Hominidae.) Gdr 19:44, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the previous commenter would have been more correct to say "Bonobos are in the chimpanzee genus". StuRat 21:05, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
They are different species. Apparently they are very similar except for their social lives, which are quite different. The oversimplified version I think is that bonobo's are more peacefully cooperative than chimps. See [73] for some examples. alteripse 01:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think social differences are sufficient to mark a species boundary, but rather physiological differences are required. StuRat 09:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
You are correct but it isnt the social differences that distinguish the two species--- they just seem far more strikingly different than the known biological differences. alteripse 00:10, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Which is more competitive:Wi-Fi/Wimax or mobile technologies like 2G and 3G?

Which is more competitive:Wi-Fi/Wimax or mobile technologies like 2G and 3G?

How much does a Wi-fi service (unlimited) cost? and what speeds do they offer?

It depends on what you want to do. At first, you actually mention THREE technologies. The oddball is WiFi, also known as 802.11 and WLAN, as it isn't really for wide-area adoption, while the other two are. Wimax and cellular networks are widearea though. If you want to be connected everywhere, you would go for one of the last ones. As I don't think WiMax has been deployed on a wide scale yet, probably cellulars will be the safe bet for the timing. It could, however very well change in the coming years, and depending on your location, YMMV. Both WiMax and mobile phone networks will also probably be quite expensive, I suppose.
If what you're looking for is a fast, cheap solution, and you can live with having your connection tied to a specific location(s), WLAN is the way to go. Base stations ("wireless access point") are availabe from around €50, and have a reach of potentially around 100 m in good conditions (more if using directional antennas i.e. fixed point-to-point systems). They are also higher-bandwidth than both WiFi and cellphone networks. So, conclusion: it really depends on what you want to do. As always. :) TERdON 23:45, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comparision between India and USA

I am interested in comparing wireless service in India and USA. In India, a CDMA 2000 1X wireless Internet connection offering speeds upto 144 kbps (unlimited) is available for Rupees 1500 (or $33). (Two companies Reliance and Tata offer this). Can anyone say how much does a similar service cost in USA. If you know how much does a similar service cost in other parts of the world, please tell.

[edit] Dam Construction

Why are there service tunnels in dams? If a dam is made of solid concrete,and water level control is by catchment and conduit not part of the dam wall, what is there to service?

Solid concrete needs occasional service, such as inspecting for and repairing small cracks before they become serious problems. Also, I suspect they use reinforced concrete, not solid concrete, but that would also require occasional inspection and repair. StuRat 20:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Hoover Dam, for one, doesn't contain rebar. It's kept in compression by its shape (like a sideways arch), so it doesn't need to be made of reinforced concrete. --Joel 20:25, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
"Welcome to Hoover Dam. I'll be your dam guide for the entire dam tour. Feel free to take as many dam pictures as you want, but please hold all your dam questions until the end." National Lampoon's Family Vacation StuRat 21:00, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Dams are meant to last a very long time. I've gone through many service tunnels, and they are necessary. They usually lead to important bits, such as the penstocks. --Zeizmic 13:18, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] inertia

I once heard that there is a term for for counterclockwise rotation of the flow of water in the southern hemisphere, is that so? And to what effect is it called. Thank you.--65.198.174.210 18:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The Coriolis effect is what you're looking for. --GraemeL (talk) 18:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Interestingly enough, the article on Coriolis effect states that it is "a popular misconception" that "the Coriolis effect determines the direction in which bathtubs or toilets drain". - Akamad 19:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_161.html has a pretty thorough description of that. Black Carrot 20:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, it would if the water in the tub was very very still and it would be unplugged without disturbing the water. I've seen this done, but it wasn't an ordinary bathtub and done under laboratory-like conditions. DirkvdM 20:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] tic/ tourette syndrome help

I've read about both tics and Tourette's syndrome on Wikipedia. Can this site provide me with the information about preferred places' I can go for medical attention, if I feel I may have either of these problems? if so, please inform me. Thank you - Unsigned.

You should consult with your personal physician, who can refer you to a neurologist if he deems it appropriate. See this link for more information: Tourette Syndrome Association, Inc. Tourette Syndrome Association, Inc. 42-40 Bell Boulevard Bayside NY 11361 Phone: (718) 224-2999 E-mail: ts@tsa-usa.org

Also see TOURETTE'S SYNDROME DOCTORS--Mark Bornfeld DDS 19:40, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] theoretical basis

what is a theoretical basis?

See theory. If some piece of information or knowledge is founded upon a theory, then that theory forms the basis of the information or knowledge. --Joel 20:07, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
The alternative is something which is strictly observed thru experimentation, but has no theoretical basis. For example, many chemicals have been identified as carcinogenic (causing cancer) without a specific theory as to how each causes cancer. StuRat 20:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Average lifespan of an eyelash

What is the average lifespan of an eyelash?

I've added this tidbit (&reference) to our eyelash article. Samw 00:42, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
4 months --Femto 21:05, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 18

[edit] How to remove "write protection" from usb flash drive?

I have a 512mb usb flash drive, and it has worked perfectly for a few weeks (since I bought it). Recently I can't use the drive because it says it's write protected. I can't put things on it, take things off it, or format it. I'm sure that it doesn't have a "write protection switch".

I've looked around on several forums, and can't find any answers that work. I've tried the manufacturers tech support, but they've not helped much.

How can I remove the write protection from my usb drive so that I can use it again? Flea110 01:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Tried formatting it? With another OS / installation ? If you can't read the data, then either some sort of encryption system has been turned on, or the thing is simply broken. Tzarius 02:46, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
I have formatted it in the past and it worked fine then. Since it started saying it's write protected, I have tried to format it on computers with windows xp, 2000, and 98. I can read the data, in as much as I can see what files are on it. I don't know if this is important, but the drive doesn't require drivers to be installed, except on windows 98. Flea110 03:10, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
That's normal - 2000 and later (nt?) come with USB Mass Storage Device drivers by default. Many manufacturers only include the driver cd for win95/98 users, and occasionaly, the product manual. For what it's worth, floppy drives give a similiar "could not write, or write protected" error in Windows when the floppy is corrupted. Tzarius 04:35, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Saliva production among ethnic groups

Is it true that ethnically Japanese people produce less saliva than Westerners, and thus tend towards wetter foods? I saw this mentioned in a bread-related anime, but couldn't find the information at saliva or Japanese people. -- Creidieki 01:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I wonder what kind of a grad student studies the amount of saliva produced by different groups of people? Poor thing... --Quasipalm 03:18, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Besides all of the other curiosities that your question suggests, what do you mean by "wetter foods"? hydnjo talk 04:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
The most logical meaning would be foods with a higher water content. A higher fat content would also help otherwise "dry" foods go down, but I can't believe anyone likes more fat in their food than Westerners. I'd talk on this subject more, but I think I'll go grab a triple bacon cheeseburger with extra mayo, a side of chili-cheese fries, and a milk shake first. StuRat 09:38, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I can think of several useful reasons for researching a correlation between salivary volume and demographic data-- for example, it could be compared with various epidemiologic data to gain insight into salivary function or the mechanism behind a particular disease-- tooth decay, for example. However, I am unaware of any studies dealing with salivary volume and ethnicity or nationality.--Mark Bornfeld DDS 14:05, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm even more concerned about the existence of "bread-related anime." --Maxamegalon2000 16:27, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


Yes, you need to digest certain parts of bread (not crust, but chemicals) with your saliva first. "saliva contains the enzyme amylase, also called ptyalin, that breaks some starches down". This is cultural, as Japanese eat less bread than rice. --DLL 23:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Number of nerve endings in the clitoris

I read somewhere that the clitoris has twice the total number of nerve endings as the penis. Is this true? It seems likely that the clitoris has twice the density of nerve endings, but it seems incredible that it has twice the total number. —Keenan Pepper 01:56, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Here's someone who seems to have some insight: [74] He pretty much agrees that they have a comparable number of nerve endings, but the clitoris has more of them directly exposed, since much more of the penis is internal. Night Gyr 02:29, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Other way round: it's actually the clitoris that is largely internal. Compare Image:Male anatomy.png (and [75]) with Image:Clitoris inner anatomy.gif. —Charles P. (Mirv) 16:21, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Density is pretty variable in this case. :) DirkvdM 08:53, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
The Vagina Monologues has popularized the "twice as many as the penis" idea. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 01:11, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah yes. I remember now. But the question remains, is it true? I'm going to say they're "roughly the same" in our clitoris article. —Keenan Pepper 18:23, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Atoms

How do you split an atom? I don't understand how you could split a microscopic object. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.177.113.158 (talk • contribs) 04:46, January 18, 2006 (UTC).

I guess you don't really split it, it's more like smashing two of them together and looking very closely at what flies out of the mess. See particle accelerator. --AySz88^-^ 05:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Atoms are smaller still, they're sub-microscopic. You can't even see them with an electron microscope. But that doesnt mean they can't be split. Nuclear fission does that. Atoms come in different sizes, containing more or less of the three building blocks electrons, protons and neutrons. Fission creates two smaller atoms from a big one by shooting a neutron into the original atom, distributing the building blocks between the two new ones. Plus some material that flies off, such as more neutrons to split yet more atoms, thus creating a chain reaction. DirkvdM 09:02, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
You can see big atoms like gold pretty well with a scanning tunneling microscope. —Keenan Pepper 13:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps the original poster is wondering how you could aim something at an atom to split it, since an atom is so tiny. The answer is that you don't. If you're trying to arrange for atoms uranium-235 to be split by neutrons, for example, then you arrange it so that a lot of neutrons will go into a mass of U-235. Some of them, by chance, will hit atoms of the U-235 in the right way; and the atoms that they happen to hit are the ones that will be split. As DirkvdM mentions, if the products of the split include more neutrons (and for U-235 that will be true), then they can split more atoms (again at random), causing a chain reaction. --Anonymous, 23:50 UTC, January 18.

[edit] How do double planets work?

A NASA spokesperson said they expect to learn a lot "about how double planets work" from the returned probe. What do we know so far (other than maybe tides)? Common Man 05:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know that they do work. In fact, it seems to me I've heard they've got nothin' to do, but roll around Heaven all day. --Trovatore 05:27, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
:-) Yeah - it's good to be a double planet! But what is it, then, that NASA is hoping to find out about them? Common Man 06:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Have a look at the mission website for a detailed look at some of the things they're hoping to learn. Basically, they currently know very about Pluto and KBO's, as even the biggest telescopes can't get particularly good images of them. --Robert Merkel 07:44, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] how to know by seeng that this port is serial and that port is parallel

how to know by seeng that this port is serial and that port is paralleltext

  • Parallel ports are usually larger than serial ports. Our article about serial ports includes a picture of one of them, and the parallel port is at least twice as wide. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 06:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
On recent PC's that still bother with these quite old interfaces, DE-9 (9-pin male) connectors are usually RS232 serial ports, and DB-25 (25-pin male) connectors are usually parallel ports. D-subminiature has a picture of the two different types of sockets. However, some really old PC's have DB-25 serial port connectors, identical to the parallel ports! In practice, they are both almost obsolete, having been replaced with the Universal Serial Bus. --Robert Merkel
Not identical. DB-25 parallel ports are female (on the computer-end). Serial ports (9 or 25-pin) are male. --BluePlatypus 14:53, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, the good old days in the 80's, when both ports were identical. Plug it in wrong and you blew something. Now, everything just fits one way -- pandering to the soft-brained. :) --Zeizmic 16:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
...except for audio jacks and those round plugs you use for mice and keyboards, plus the continued use of D-subs for everything from modems to monitors. And of course, it's quite easy to plug, say, an RJ11 phone plug in an RJ45 Ethernet socket. Not to mention those fancy multiport flash card readers — just try figuring out how to correctly plug, say, an xD card in one of those. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 11:55, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Misplaced Earth Tilt question

Is it possible the earthquake that created the tsunami of December 16, 2004 has had an effect on global warming? The NASA website has published the earth tilted on its axis by as much as 2 centimeters and the sphere of the earth was also flattened causing the revolution of the earth to slow down. Would this change global temperature? I have not seen or heard of any reference of the two being linked or related. (unknown author/time)

(Moved from top of page --AySz88^-^ 08:06, 18 January 2006 (UTC))

It takes an enormous amount of energy to shift the earth by 2 cm, but that's still so tiny as to be insignificant compared to the size of the earth. Night Gyr 08:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Any change in the Earth's temp would be completely insignificant. StuRat 09:03, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
A change in tilt measured in cm?? At the surface, I suppose, but still an odd way of expressing it. DirkvdM 09:10, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

The earth wobbles on its axis all the time (Chandler wobble). Usually they measure the migration of the actual North Pole as it exists on the surface (makes it tougher for explorers chasing it around!). Really big earthquakes can cause the plot to shift suddenly. No effect on climate, though. --Zeizmic 13:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Do Fish Get Thirsty?

Do salt water fish dehydrate from drinking salt water? How do fish drink? How often?

Fish do drink water, but I don't know how often. They have special cells in their gills that maintain the concentration of salts in their bodies by actively pumping out ions like sodium and chloride. —Keenan Pepper 16:06, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
First fish where born in less salted oceans. Now they need to maintain that peculiar state. Note that fish are our ancestors : our blood and cells do the same all the time, so we need kidneys and all that stuff. --DLL 23:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Homer Smith wrote a book entitled From Fish to Philosopher, which addressed evolution of kidney function and the differences in function needed to exist on land versus a saltwater environment. Fish do not need to drink in the same sense we do to replace water lost in sweat and breathing, but they still need to ingest enough water to serve as a vehicle to excrete things that need to be excreted. alteripse 00:08, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vapor pressure

Question: (Vapor Pressure) Say for instance I take the classical experiment to calculate vapor pressure – i.e. a closed container filled halfway with a liquid (say Benzene) and attached to it a simple manometer to measure the vapor pressure. At a fixed temperature I will measure a certain vapor pressure. What happens if now I put a valve between the manometer and the container to “Discharge” the vapor pressure? Will it build up again? Say I discharge it again? Please explain. Martin van Rooyen

The vapor pressure will always return to the same equilibrium vapor pressure as long as there is liquid left. —Keenan Pepper 15:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Fo'shure, we have here a homework-seeker. --Zeizmic 16:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grep Question

I want to search CSV files for values. I was using: grep ",text to look for," * The problem is that that will ignore values at the beginning or end of a line. I tried: grep "[^,]text to look for[,$]" *, but that obviously will not work. How to you state "Beginning of file or a comma" and "End of file or a comma" in grep's regex? --Kainaw (talk) 15:38, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I think you can use "\|" to match either of two expressions, as in ",text to look for,\|^text to look for,\|...". —Keenan Pepper 15:50, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Found it: using (^|,) means "beginning of line or a comma". My mistake was using the square brackets. --Kainaw (talk) 15:53, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Cant't see the need for grepping commas ? Is the returned text not the same with grep "text to look for" * ? --DLL 23:27, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
No, not the same. Consider what happens if the field contains something like "this is not the text to look for". The simple grep will find it, and that's wrong.
Depending on the version of grep in use, you may need to use an option -E or invoke it under the name egrep in order for the (^|,) syntax to be accepted. In traditional grep, ( and | were non-special characters. Evidently it worked for Kainaw, though. --Anonymous, 23:58 UTC, January 18.
Correct, I did use egrep (while grep -E would have worked as well). As why I need to grep for commas... This is a CSV file - a comma separated text database dump. If I want an entry containing 123, I do not want 1234 or 0123. So, I have to declare the beginning and end of the entry with the commas (or the beginning/end of the line). --Kainaw (talk) 21:28, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] holographic film composition

I am curious as to what kind of thermoplastic is used in the thin film that constitutes the holographic layer in the conventional hologram -- not the polyester base film of the embossed copies. Joss

[edit] Total number of cell divisions in the history of life?

Do you have an estimation for "Total number of cell divisions in the history of life?" Thanks

Somewhere between the number of grains of sand on a beach and the number of stars in the heavens. GeeJo (t) (c) • 20:02, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Newton showed that to be precisely 5.34865 shitloads. History has proved him startlingly accurate. Black Carrot 20:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


Taking inspiration from the Drake Equation, I have created the "Johntex equation" in attempt to estimate how many cell divisions have occured since the origin of life on Earth:

Variable Description Value Source
EarthPop Current world human population 6,450,000,000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
HBC Cells in an average human body 1E+14 http://ask.yahoo.com/20020625.html
HBCD Number of cell divisions needed to make 1 x 10^14 cells 7.03687E+13 Math
HBCR Numer of times, on average, each cell in the human body replaced during life 3 My estimate
PerBio Percent humans comprise of the world's biomass 1% http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/plant_food_040629.html
Years Years since the origin of life 4E+12 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_life
Turnover Number of years needed for world's biomass to turn-over, on average 20 My estimate
Conclusion Total number of cell divisions= 2.72E+47 =EarthPop * HBC * HBCD * HBCR * PerBio * Years / Turnover

The total of 2.72E+47 would be just for life on Earth.

If one wanted to also consider the number of cell divisions that have occured in extraterrestrial life, one could multiply by the number of worlds that support life using a modified version of the Drake Equation. To do this, one would ommitt the variables relating to the life forms developing an intelligent culture, for example:

If R=10, fp=0.5, ne=2, fl=1, and L=100,000,000, then the modified Drake equation would give 1E+09.

Multiplying 2.72E+47 by 1E+09, we get 2.72E+56 for the total number of cell divisions of all life anywhere in the Milky Way. By comparison, the total number of stars in the Milky Way is estimated to be something more than 2E+9. By these calculations, the number of cell divisions that have occured in the galaxy would be about 1.36E+47 times more than the number of stars in the galaxy.

I think these figures are probably accurate to within about 10 orders of magnitude. Johntex\talk 22:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I can knock three orders of magnitude off your estimate straight away; 4000 million years is 4 \times 10^{9}. --Robert Merkel 22:34, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, cells in the human body are replaced (on average) way more than 3 times in your lifetime, given that skin cells go through mitosis roughly once a day, and meiosis of sperm occurs roughly every 3 days. Also, about 30% of the Earth's biomass is inert, dead cells [76]. GeeJo (t) (c) • 13:03, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Excellent! I am very happy to see that people are suggesting better valuables for some of the variables. If we say the average person replaces their cells every third day on average (I am assuming skin cells go through mitosis more frequently than the average cell), and assuming the average life-span is 70 years, then (70 years * 365days/year * 1/3division/day) = 8,500 complete cell replacements in a human life. That is almost a three order of magnitude increase, which roughly counters the 3 orders I was off with my 400 million years mistake. I'm not sure how to account for the 30% of the biomass that is dead. Something living will come along and eat it, but how quickly, I'm not sure. I would guess this inert biomass is not affecting things more than an order of magnitude, but that's just a guess. This whole exercise is obviously an inexact science! Johntex\talk 17:27, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

That equation doesn't look quite right to me. For example, why would you multiply by 1% if you thought humans were 1% of the biomass on Earth ? You should multiply by 100 instead. Of course, this is still assuming humans' cellular reproduction rate is the same as the average of all life, which is a highly questionable assumption.

I would also think you would do best to ignore humans and concentrate on life forms which have been alive for much longer than us and which have cells that reproduce much faster than us, such as bacteria. They will account for far more of the cell divisions in the history of the world than humans will. StuRat 22:41, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Both good points! Thanks! Johntex\talk 21:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] physics and baseball

How does hitting a baseball relate towards physics? Please be specific. Thanks.

Look in the book your teacher gave you and find anything relating to "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." Then, you will be able to follow the rule at the top of this page: Do your own homework. --Kainaw (talk) 19:32, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
As a place to start, looking at Momentum couldn't hurt. I'd recommend trajectory, but my eyes glazed over half-way through a scan. GeeJo (t) (c) • 20:06, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm sure it doesn't relate. We have a quite good physics education here in the university, but no baseball team. – b_jonas 10:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah but if you DID ... freshgavin TALK 02:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] State of Nitrogen

What state is Nitrogen at 20 degree c please

I'll leave the abuse to somebody else...--Zeizmic 20:22, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
A diatomic gas. given that air is about 70% Nitrogen, you'd be in trouble if it were anything else. GeeJo (t) (c) • 20:36, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
At 20 °C, nitrogen is almost entirely in a singlet state. Physchim62 (talk) 20:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Bah, my brain's still in High-school science mode from the previous question! :) GeeJo (t) (c) • 21:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe Wikipedia needs Reference desk:High School Homework Questions. --Kainaw (talk) 21:21, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
AKA: Reference desk:Insulting and Sarcastic Answers :-). smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 22:09, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
We already have one of those--205.188.116.74 00:55, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, it doesn't have to be a gas, does it? It wasn't mentioned at which pressure... TERdON

[edit] Why shouldn't ether or chloroform be used as a solvent for the titration of an ASA Tablet?

Why shouldn't ether or chloroform be used as a solvent for the titration of an ASA Tablet? --(Aytakin) | Talk 22:21, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Have we upgraded to university homework? My first answer would be 'Try it and find out'. --Zeizmic 23:14, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

If you're just going to blow off the question, please just don't leave any answer at all. The question asked was not obvioulsy a homework question. And 'try it and find out' is a pretty bad answer to many lab research questions if for no other reason than it wastes reagents (which are often purchased with taxpayer dollars).
Long story short - if you don't feel like answering questions that you think are stupid....do bother with the reference desk. It is the designated place on Wikipedia for stupid questions. ike9898 23:26, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
The statement "The question asked was not obvioulsy a homework question." assumes a lot. I work with doctors and residents all day. Never have I heard a single one sit around the break room and chat about solvents for the titration of aspirin. Neither ehter nor choloroform are sitting on the shelf at WalMart, prompting the average person to say, "Wow. I think I'll soak my aspiring in that!" So, this has to be a person who has a reason to use ether/chloroform and aspirin together. This is most likely a pharmacy student since it is a very common assignment to use methanol, ethanol, chloroform, and acetate in the titration of aspirin. --Kainaw (talk) 23:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Lots of people who do research aren't students. In my work it is quite common to read an unfamilar experimental protocol, and not understand the reason for each of the steps. This situation genenerates questions like the one above on a regular basis. ike9898 15:17, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course it may have been someone's homework question, but it was not anything like the really blanant ones we get: "Explain the effects of the French Revolution on ..." Anyway, I still think that a snarky answer is worse than no answer at all. ike9898 15:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Remeber the characteristics of ether and chloroform and think what problems these might cause when trying to do an accurate titration. - Mgm|(talk) 09:16, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 19

[edit] Is this "book" real?

Greetings:

While looking through "Wikipedia in books" I came across this particular title:

Paulo Correa, M.Sc., Ph.D., Alexandra Correa, H.BA., Malgosia Askanas, Ph.D. (User:Helicoid) Wikipedia: A Techno-Cult of Ignorance, ISBN 1-894840-36-4

However, upon searching through Amazons I cannot find the book by its title nor the ISBN. I'm wondering : is this book for real or not?

Regards,

129.97.252.63 00:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

http://<spam blocked url>/antiwikipedia/awp_index.html --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Wow.. Those are crackpots if I ever saw one. :) --BluePlatypus 09:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh my... This is something special, something very special indeed... -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 11:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Classic stuff. I love that they complain that WP has Morphic Resonance down as a psuedoscience. Scandalous! Next we'll be saying the Easter Bunny isn't real. Noodhoog 14:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

http://<spam blocked url>/antiwikipedia2/awp2_index.html the sequel. "Wikipedia: The Rise of the Latrines" -- It's not all wrong. GangofOne 23:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

  • These guys are total nuts. See Talk:Aetherometry. They only self-publish. --Fastfission 04:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Insects-ants

How do we differentiate male and female ants?????

See Ant. David Sneek 08:15, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Imagine picking up an ant and trying to find its genitals. :) Hence the Dutch word 'mierenneuken' (antfucking) for making a fuss about something minute. DirkvdM 08:41, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Just kill them all. Don't differentiate. (Anyway, I think male ants have wings.) – b_jonas 10:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, but so do the queens that leave the nest to start a new one. Except that they're quite a bit bigger. By the way, beware of the ant liberation front. They might want to fumigate you now. :) DirkvdM 09:13, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Title bird flu h5n1 wing and a feather

Title h5n1 bird flu wing and a feather Bird flu, on a wing, and a feather, or h5n1 is three microns think how light is that! At a community home construction site a gust of wind or sustained wind can blow two Acers of dirt into the air in 1920 the great dust bowl people in New York had to ware masks to breath to cope with the dust from the dust bowl look it up and in storms freezing air can move up to the jet streams move around the globe fast. A chicken farm, country, or cites will get high winds too. Question can this be so? If this can happen why try to stop it! Spend more money on keeping people living and make plans for removal of masses of dead. Also h5n1 at freezing temp can live forever at a temp of 32 h5n1 well live for thirty-two hours at seventy-two one hour that would make it a fact! Air born. Thank you Les Poppa ps i did watchlist i think but i did not find bookmark thank you can you help

Although this apparently is the place reserved for stupidity (whoops, intelligence-challenged, i-c), it would help for people to read the preamble and to type in full English (not texting mode). However, perhaps it is cruel to ask i-c people to read... --Zeizmic 13:10, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
There's no need for sarcasm. Did you consider the possibility that the poster's native language is not English? —Keenan Pepper 17:42, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I think their question is: "If winds can blow up massive quantities of dirt from the ground, can't they also blow up massive quantities of bird-flu infected feces from poultry farms ? If so, how can we stop this from spreading bird flu ?".
The only solution I see is to keep all birds inside. StuRat 21:39, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Remember the masks people were wearing during tha SARS scare? Surely we know by now what size face mesh to protect against the latest scare. Seriously, consider tuberculosis which is spread the same way. People have it, they cough, their spittum lands on the ground, dries up, becomes dust, which the wind picks up and blows, and other people breathe, and now they have the disease also. Used to be worldwide lots of people had that disease. Public health figured out how to stop it, then had to fight to get the right authority to enforce the solution. I figure a few thousand people will need to die in any given country before they get the right kind of authority to solve the problem. Ande then we have denial, like nations in Africa led by leaders who not accept how AIDS gets spread, so it spreads even faster. User:AlMac|(talk) 04:17, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] bi-metallic alloy steels

wat r the points to consider while modifing a composition of a casting to make it even harder. for example I hav a casting (part) which function is reduce friction between stationary and rotating parts.

( itz name is slip seals used for kilns)

[edit] Repainting a car

Is it possible to have a car repainted a different colour? Or can car paint only be applied during the manufacturing process (because, for instance, it must be specially bonded to the metal)? Is it legal to do so in France (I presume so, even though the change probably needs to be registered with the vehicle authority, but I thought I'd better ask)? Thanks in advance! — QuantumEleven | (talk) 08:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Yes, cars can be repainted, although for it to be most effective, you probably need to strip the old paint of it first. And you were right in your assumption it has potential problems. It is illegal when done to stolen cars, but I'm sure that if registered with the proper authorities it should be no problem. - Mgm|(talk) 09:20, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Mgm! Just OOC, how would a car garage (ie a professional, not me!) strip the paint from a car without damaging the underlying structure? Sanding? Sandblasting? Solvents? — QuantumEleven | (talk) 16:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I would guess they use solvents so as not to affect the rust-proofing underneath: hence you need to get it done in a professional workshop that has suitable ventilation and safety equipment. In France, you would need to change the carte grise (registration document) at your local Préfecture: I don't know if they charge for this. Physchim62 (talk) 18:32, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes, cars can be repainted a different colour from the original and no, the old paint need not be removed first. What the car repainter (body-shop) does is lightly sand the original surface and then fine-finish (compound) to provide a smooth surface. Next a primer (optional) is sprayed on, painted, baked (optional) and clear-coated (optional). If you want to know if a car has been repainted with a defferent colour look at the underside of the trunk lid (hardly ever repainted). hydnjo talk 21:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bitmap Images

Which two types of bitmap images are used most often on the internet? Thanks for your time. J.

81.96.4.136 10:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd say the JPEG and the GIF, though PNG files are also fairly common. GeeJo (t) (c) • 12:08, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
As far as I know ... JPEGs aren't considered bitmapped images! (1 bit space for 1 pixel) I'm not sure about the PNG file format though. freshgavin TALK 01:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Strictly speaking, none of those formats are bitmap formats, as they do not directly correspond to an array of pixels. However, all of them are raster image formats, which was almost certainly what was intended (as opposed to vector graphics). —David Wahler (talk) 02:28, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
On the other hand, the most common real bitmap formats are probably portable pixmap and Windows bitmap. —Keenan Pepper 18:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Where did "I" come from?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_(electricity) You state that "The symbol typically used for the amount of current (the amount of charge Q flowing per unit of time t) is I, from the German word Intensität, which means 'intensity'.".

Which confuses me especially since André-Marie Ampère is french.

I have looked high and low, but I cannot find a reference to prove (or disprove) where the "I" was derived. Can you help me with a solid reference?

Thank you, Eugene

It comes from the word "intensity", or "intensität" or "intensité". Ampère himself used the phrase "l'intensité du courant électrique". See his writings. --BluePlatypus 12:44, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Planet X

Why is it that neither Pluto nor the Kuiper Belt are Planet X? The Planet X article describes this but it does not explain how this is infered mexaguil 11:04, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Pluto's mass was too small to fit the Planet X hypothesis, and the hypothesis itself has been disproven by more correct measurements of the outer planets' masses. This is both mentioned in the Planet X article, by the way :) -- Ferkelparade π 11:29, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] mutiplex,hub switch,and router

i want to know what difference between multiplex,hub switch and router?please help me...

You should start with our articles on multiplex, hub, switch, and router. Some or all may lead to other subjects than networking, but there should also be a "for other uses of <article>, please see..." link at the top. — Lomn Talk 13:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why do the wheel of a car looks to rotate reverse at some speed

This isn't just limited to the wheels of a car - you can also see it in LPs, for instance. I believe it's due to an interference effect, which occurs because your eyes only have a limited "refresh rate" (ie they only pick up new information at a certain rate, approximately ten times a second IIRC). If the wheel has repeating radial markings (eg spokes), if it spins at a certain speed, your eyes think that each spoke has moved slightly backwards when in fact it's the previous spoke which has not quite reached the position of the next one in the time it takes your eyes to take in new information. So your eyes are telling you that the spokes are actually moving slowly backwards... — QuantumEleven | (talk) 14:26, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

This is a good question. It's answered under Wagon-wheel effect. It's best seen on old John Wayne movies. --Zeizmic 15:17, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for that link, Zeizmic - it's a far better description than I managed to cook up! — QuantumEleven | (talk) 16:55, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Also note that fluorescent street lights may cause the Wagon-wheel effect on car wheels. StuRat 20:38, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I wonder why it is that the wagon-wheels seem to drift backwards much more often than forward. Is there a wagon-wheel coriolis like effect going on here? ;-) hydnjo talk 21:33, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
It's just a function of the frame rate, the number of spokes, and the rate of rotation of the wheels. I also suspect that we only notice when the wheels appear to be going backwards, and ignore the less interesting cases where they appear to be going forwards, but at a slower rate. StuRat 22:29, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] website navigation

What is the importance of having alternative methods of site navigation?

Thanks,in anticipation81.96.4.136 15:20, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

For accessibility purposes. Text links, for instance, are important for screen readers (which tend to operate much like the old Lynx browser). Hotkeyed links are helpful for users who eschew the mouse. Non-Flash navigation is essential for users without Flash. — Lomn Talk 15:57, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I think having a site map is quite valuable. Without it, the user may have to wade through many pages and wait for graphics to load, close pop-up windows, etc., to eventually find the page they want. StuRat 20:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Or wade through many pages to discover that the site only contains graphics, pop-up windoes, etc... and no content. --Kainaw (talk) 20:39, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Agreed, that's even worse. StuRat 07:21, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Contrary to what some people beleive, not everyone uses the same browser, so having alternative means to access a site means more people will be able to visit it. - Mgm|(talk) 09:50, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shavers

In Britain everything uses 13-amp plugs except for electric shavers which for some reason use two pin plugs. Why is this, and why is it only for electric shavers? smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 15:10, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

British Standard 1363 makes it illegal for any three-pin plug sockets to be installed in a bathroom due to risk of electrocution. The socket for razors is covered by BS EN 60742 Chapter 2, Section 1 - which allows for their installation only where direct spray from showers is unlikely. GeeJo (t) (c) • 15:37, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
This may be incredibly daft of me, but how does a three-pin plug socket (where the three wires are, presumably, live, neutral and earth) increase the risk of electrocution? If you come into contact with a live wire, the electricity will flow through you into the Earth, electrocuting you. This would happen regardless of the presence of an earth plug socket or not. Indeed, presuming the main transmission risk in a bathroom is through water, wouldn't an earth plug (a three-pin plug socket) reduce the risk of electrocution, because water which would transmit electricity from the socket into you would probably come into contact with the earth plug socket as well, thereby shorting the circuit directly to the earth plug, and blowing the fuse before the electricity goes through you? What am I missing? — QuantumEleven | (talk) 16:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I think your missing the point, i thinks its more to do with having a different plug in the bathroom so you don't get tempted to put your plasma screen in there.

Have they invented GFI's in Britain yet? --Zeizmic 17:31, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Our article BS 1363 gives some description and this article says that the standard BS 1363 is to be installed throughout (no bathroom exception). A point of confusion may be interchanging the words outlet (on the wall) and plug (on the device). The outlet requires that a third prong on the plug (device) be present and inserted into the outlet in order for the other two plug prongs to be allowed "in". Since double insulated devices (electric shavers, hair dryers, etc) don't really need this third "earth/ground" connection for safety, those devices may use a non-conducting (plastic) prong in order to open the outlet for the other two prongs on the device to be allowed in. Back to the original question, device manufacturers have devised some proprietary workarounds that permit their double insulated devices to be inserted while having only two prongs and I suspect that is what Smurrayinchester was referring to.hydnjo talk 19:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Bathroom shaver sockets are not directly connected to the mains. The current is transferred through a transformer, so no earth circuit can be made. Possibly the different, incompatible, shaver plug (and corresponding shaver socket) is to prevent higher rated appliances from being plugged into this low power arrangement. Notinasnaid 23:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Worlds highest horse jump

how high was the world tallest horse jump?and a picture possibly?

According to [77] (Which has pictures), the highest official jump by a horse was 8ft 2 inches, or 2.47 meters. Unofficially it may have been 8ft 3 1/2 inches GeeJo (t) (c) • 15:25, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Combining wired and wireless computers on one network

I want to add a wireless laptop to my wired home network. Do I need a wireless router or a wireless access point - or can I use either? 68.115.110.13 17:15, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I have a mixture at home -- no problem. Do your homework before buying! --Zeizmic 17:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

There are many wired/wireless combo home network kits (hubs, switches, routers -- whatever marketing wants to call them). They are easy to install and easy to use. Just make sure you read the section on wireless security setup. I set mine up so only my laptop's wireles NIC is allowed to join the wireless network. --Kainaw (talk) 18:11, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
A wireless access point is sufficient. A wireless router is really a combo of access point, firewall, DCHP server, and several other things. However, your wired network is likely centered around a home router that already provides all of the above save for the wireless access point, so there's no need to duplicate that functionality.
That said, most wireless routers can be configured to run as access points, and should the wired router then die, you can reset the wireless to full-featured mode and you'll have an immediate replacement hardware piece. — Lomn Talk 18:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] computer sciences

what kind Future trends are there for artificial intelligence? give some ideas or exapmles of what there is going to be or what you think.

from J.L

Please do your own homework. --GraemeL (talk) 17:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
There is plenty of info in artificial intelligence. --Kainaw (talk) 18:07, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
They'll soon replace us and answer all questions here on the Reference Desk. – b_jonas 16:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Determining which wire is hot and which is neutral

The wiring in my house is very old, so the wires aren't color coded (they're all black). I was replacing a 2-prong receptacle and I couldn't determine which was the hot wire. I assumed I could do this with my multimeter. However either way I connected the multimeter leads to the wires, the meter read +120V. (I guess this is something about AC that I don't completely understand). But anyway.....How can I determine which is the 'hot' wire? It does matter, doesn't it? ike9898 18:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

  • You can buy an outlet tester at your local hardware store. They're pretty cheap. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 18:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
  • As for what you're seeing, the multimeter is reading, if I recall correctly, RMS AC voltage, which doesn't care about the alternating polarity. You might check out alternating current and single-phase electric power for some extra reading on what's running around in there. As for "it does matter, doesn't it?": If you mean the eventual connection's left/right orientation, no, it doesn't matter. — Lomn Talk 18:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
If I'm not mistaken, it does matter-- if the outlet is being upgraded to the new-style polarized two-prong grounded variety. You wouln't want to put the hot lead on the ground prong, would you?--Mark Bornfeld DDS 19:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The concept is right but the terminology is wrong. A polarized two-prong plug has a hot or live wire and a "cold", neutral, or return wire. In the US/Canadian system, the hot wire should connect to the smaller of the two parallel slots. "Ground prong" refers to the third prong on a three-prong (grounded) plug. --Anonymous, 21:45 UTC, January 19, 2006.
Use the multimeter to measure the voltage between each of the wires (one at a time) to "ground". You may need to get creative about how you connect the multimeter to "ground" as the outlet box itself may not be "grounded". A nearby radiator or cold water pipe will do. Anyway when the meter is connected between the hot wire and "ground" it will show the line (120) voltage and will register nearly (or exactly) zero volts from the other black wire to ground. hydnjo talk 19:37, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
This is correct. Note that if you don't find a good ground, you will get a zero reading between either wire and whatever else you try. In that case you may need to run a wire to another room where you can connect it to your plumbing system, and use that as your ground. Only when you have ground to one wire reading near 0 and ground to the other wire reading near 120 can you be sure you have the right wire.
Rather than working with the bare wires, if the old outlet is still working it is safer to leave it in place and insert a meter probe into one slot rather than contacting that wire. But make sure they don't accidentally break contact and give a false 0 reading. --Anonymous

Could I use the current setting on my multimeter to determine which is which? ike9898 22:04, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

  • No! The voltage setting actually measures current, but through a large (known) resistance. The current setting just removes the resistance; it's meant to be used with the meter wired in series with a normal load. --Anonymous, 07:09 UTC, January 20.
It's a fundamental thing with AC, you can't tell which is which with just the 2 wires (symmetry). You need a third ground, which is what the polarized plug is protecting you from (I work at a power company). In other words, if you are screwing in a lightbulb, the outside thread should be neutral and should not allow yourself to become a short to ground. My hundred-year old house had this really bad wiring, and I had it all replaced. It's not worth your life! You know you are in trouble if you feel 'tingle' voltage from your fridge. One day you'll be turning off the tap at the same time as closing the fridge and POW! --Zeizmic 23:15, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand. Someone above suggested that a cheap tester from the hardware store could tell...from just one wire, if I understand correctly. This seems to contradict your answer. Can you straiten me out? ike9898 00:52, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, there are such things as contact-free voltage detectors. These can be used to detect a live AC wire without any grounding. We don't seem to have an article on them, though, or else I just don't know the correct English name. Here's an example, though: [78] —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 23:32, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
The original question asked about using a multimeter, which measures voltages between its two contacts. Using a multimeter you must have a ground. The detectors just described work differently. I think they are based on the capacitance of your own body and detect the tiny AC current that flows thorugh the detector when you touch it to a live AC wire while holding it. If there is no ground nearby, it would be more convenient to obtain one of these. --Anonymous, 07:15 UTC, January 20.
I would have thought the contact-free detectors detect the radio waves? —Keenan Pepper 19:12, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmm. The detector I was thinking of when I mentioned capacitance, you touch one end of it to the wire while holding the other end, but you don't need to be grounded. My father used to have one. That reminds me, I have to call him... thanks. If there's also one that doesn't require touching the wire at all, it would probably be detecting the changing electric field around the wire. Do these exist cheaply for household power levels? --Anonymous, 17:48 UTC, January 20. power levels? --Anonymous, 17:48 UTC, January 20.
My multimeter has a button labeled NCV (non-contact voltage?). If you hold the meter within about 2 inches of a live wire, it will chirp. This multimeter was middle-of-the-road at the time when I bought it. ike9898 21:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
And it works by radio waves, right? —Keenan Pepper 23:40, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quantum Mechanics and David Deutsch

Is QM just theoretical? or is it reasonable to say that our world at that level is actually that weird...I doubt people that are so sure about that, like mystics, because I think QM is described by mathematical formluas which we may be missunderstanding somehow, or something like a hidden variable might be underneath all that QM weirdness.--Cosmic girl 19:19, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the basics of QM are widely accepted by the scientific community, so in this sense "it is real". However, I agree that I find certain extensions unsatisfactory, like the idea that knowledge of an event actually effects the event (as in the Schrodinger's cat experiment where they claim the cat is both alive and dead, perhaps in alternate universes, until the box is opened). Maybe some later addition to QM will remove this weirdness. StuRat 20:04, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Cat isn't both dead and alive, due to reduction of wave-front. At least, they teached us that :) ellol 12:46, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

great, I agree, but for example, what do you think about David Deutsch? I don't know if I missunderstood the article, but How can an infinite computation (software and information) be possible without a computer (hardware)to contain it? here is one quote of his: Think of all our knowledge-generating processes, our whole culture and civilization, and all the thought processes in the minds of every individual, and indeed the entire evolving biosphere as well, as being a gigantic computation. The whole thing is executing a self-motivated, self-generating computer program. More specifically it is, as I have mentioned, a virtual-reality program in the process of rendering, with ever-increasing accuracy, the whole of existence. I don't understand what he means since he is an atheist and that sounds a lot like abstract and uncomprehensible mysticism and absolutism to me. other way to put it would be the way he said it, but stressing that there's a reality outside that whole of existence he talks about, because that whole of existence mus be being computed somewhere otherwise it would be just God. I mean, how can a virtual reality be self generating? i think it can only be so from a 'pantheist' view...but not from a virtual reality view, since that requires an outside world I think.--Cosmic girl 20:41, 19 January 2006 (UTC)


As for the "self-generating" reality, it is possible for a simple system to become increasing more complex, such as when laminar flow turns into turbulance, provided that some microscopic "nucleation site" exists to start the process. Crystal formation from a supersaturated solution has a similar requirement. However, I don't know of any way to explain how something can come, literally, from nothing. As far as I understand it, there must always be some "seed" to start anything. StuRat 22:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
In fact, some elements of physics make no sense without quantum physics, such as certain characteristics of light and photons. But most likely that quote is based either on new age mystical beliefs or way too much Matrix... smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:55, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
The quote is probably out of context to some degree, but the way I'd interpret it based on what you've quoted is that he thinks the "program" is producing an ever-increasingly accurate model of "the whole of existence". I don't see what that would have to do with QM, though. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Don't read to much into QM. It's just physics, not metaphysics. There's a lot of new-agey stuff out there trying to make it into more than it is. If you're really interested in QM you should learn it from physics books and stay far, far, away from the 'philosophial' stuff. Quantum mech is not a philosophy. It is not even terribly weird. It's just that things on a very very small scale turn out to behave very differently than things that are on a human scale. So humans find it weird. But building a philosophy around that is just silly, like how the Pythagoreans built a whole philosophy/religion around geometry. --BluePlatypus 12:29, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
IBM Labs built a quantum computer some time ago. It does not do much, but certainly indicates to me this stuff is not some science fiction fantasy. User:AlMac|(talk) 04:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

thank you BluePlatypus, I agree with you totally, some time ago I bought into that new agey BS but fortunately it was for much less than a couple of months, because I soon realized how silly it was. and I read about QM in physics pages but for kids since I have no clue when it comes to all the math involved.--Cosmic girl 23:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chemistry Problem

Okay, I've finished the rest of the worksheet, but i really don't know how to find the grams per mole (gfm) of barium chlorate Ba(ClO3)2. Anyway. Can anyone please explain this to me? It's supposed to be 304 but I don't know how to do it.

Well, your know the molar masses of the elements involved, right? Then you just need to count how many atoms of each element the compound contains, multiply the masses by those, and add them together. Or is there some problem I've missed? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:15, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm...I still don't understand, sorry. Can you explain it step by step?
A mole is just a certain number of atoms, a number chosen so that the number of grams per mole is the same as the molecular weight (in atomic mass units). Let's say the chemical was sulfuric acid (H2SO4). Hydrogen has atomic weight 1.008 (also called atomic mass; it is really a weighted average of the masses of different isotopes). Sulfur has atomic weight 32.065. Oxygen has atomic weight 15.999. The molecular weight is 1.008×2 + 32.065 + 15.999×4 = 98.077. So sulfuric acid has 98.077 grams per mole, if I haven't slipped up. You will need to work to the appropriate precision for your purposes, of course. --Anonymous, 22:00 UTC, January 19, 2006.
thanks!
Now that's a very nice specific homework aspect we like to see (and a thank-you!) Nobody here is above helping with a sticking point in a homework question. --Zeizmic 23:23, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
The primary difference is that the question was not: "Do my homework for me." It was "Show me how to do my homework." --Kainaw (talk) 00:14, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I actually bother to read the rules!
And believe me, we appreciate it more than you know. Cernen Xanthine Katrena 07:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Horror Story

On the busride home today, I heard something I have to ask about. It fits the traditional Urban Legend model, even makes use of some of the old plot standbys; so it's unlikely that it's true, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. It supposedly happened to a friend of someone who had theatre class with one of the people on my bus. Here's how it goes, more or less:

Some guy was eating out a girl who had crabs, which I assume he wasn't aware of. There was an icecube involved, though details weren't mentioned on that score. At some point he swallowed something that he assumed was the ice cube. A few days/weeks later, the area of his face around his mouth started "breaking out", and he went to the doctor. As it turned out, he had gotten a crab infestation under his lips. As it later turned out, he had swallowed a "sac of eggs", and the hatched crabs came up his esophagus and out his mouth because they "couldn't make it in his stomach."

So, here are my questions. Are there guys who would do that knowingly? What would happen to crabs in your mouth? The pubic lice article says eggs are laid individually, so a "sac of eggs" is ridiculous, but is there anything that could be swallowed? What would happen to eggs in the stomach? In the esophagus? What about hatched crabs? It seems unlikely that any of them could survive the horrible chemicals in the human stomach, but if they could, wouldn't they get flushed into the intestine? --Black Carrot 21:31, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Lice are transmitted by close personal contact. If there is any truth to your narrative, it is possible that the recipient merely acquired the infestation by direct contact rather than ingestion. This is more likely if he had facial hair. Most human parasites are quite limited in their ability to survive outside their accustomed habitat, which is on the surface of hair-bearing skin for the pubic louse. They cannot survive in the stomach or the mouth for any length of time.
Now, as to whether a guy would swallow crab lice knowingly-- we'll probably find out next season on Fear Factor ;-)--Mark Bornfeld DDS 22:07, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Head and body lice can live anywhere on the body. The lice we slangily refer to as crabs are mostly confined to the pubic region. They can survive elsewhere on the body (primarily the armpits), but they will not thrive. So, it is reasonable that they could survive for a few life-cycles in a mustache or beard.
They will not survive in the mouth. They live on hair. I seriously doubt the man had hair growing inside his mouth.
They do not lay egg sacs (as a spider does). The female will lay about 40 eggs, attached to the hairs. They are very tightly attached. That is why combing will not remove them. So, the idea that someone swallowed a lice egg sac shows a complete ignorance about lice. Regardless, the stomach acid in a human will dissolve and digest an egg sac - which would be full of some good protein. So, the man would benefit from the ordeal in the end. --Kainaw (talk) 00:23, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
It always feels good to hear a horror story is bull. As far as the 'naked eye', what do pubic lice look like, individually and en masse? Black Carrot 04:16, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I believe lice and eggs can be seen with the naked eye, but, in the case of eggs, since they are still and close to the size of a human hair, it takes a keen eye and a lot of patience to look for them. StuRat 06:07, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
When magnified, pubic lice look like crabs - which is why they are called crabs. The eggs look like off-white yellowish bumps on the side of the hair itself. They are firmly attached to the hair and cannot be removed by combing, rubbing, washing - or anything like that. Shaving is the best method for removing the eggs. But, as the nurse told us in Boot Camp - you've got to shave it all like a Brazilian model. --Kainaw (talk) 13:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I've realized there are a few things I'm still not clear about. How long would they survive in the mouth and/or esophagus, or stuck on or between the teeth? Before they died, would they have the chance to bite you, and cause a rash? Black Carrot 02:17, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HealthCare system of canada

Can i have your opinion on canada'a health care system? I've read that canada's federal and provincial government has no longer effective control over its healthcare system. what are the doctors reaction over this system? Are they satisfied with their income plannings? Can you throw some light on this issue and let me have some information about it. thanks!

Very polite question, but this is not the place for it. --Zeizmic 23:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I've only worked with one doctor from Canada. She didn't like it much and refused to return after working in our U.S. hospital system. But, I can't claim it is strictly the hospital system. I also work with doctors from Nigeria, Syria, Israel, and China. They don't return either. There is no way the U.S. hospital system is that great. I think they just enjoy how spoiled everyone is here. --Kainaw (talk) 00:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Do you mean they didn't return to their native country or didn't return to the U.S.? --AySz88^-^ 03:52, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I believe they meant they remain in the US instead of returning to their native countries, presumably due to the higher pay rate in the US. StuRat 06:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Correct. They remain here in the U.S. as long as possible. It is not just the higher pay. Many of them went to school in the U.S. on student loans. By law, if they move out of the U.S., they are not required to pay back the loan. So, they accept the debt payments as a fee to remain in the U.S. instead of returning to their previous country. Personally, I'd move back for a few years until the student loan people forgot me and then return to the U.S. to cash in on the M.D. degree. --Kainaw (talk) 13:55, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
It partially depends on what kind of doctor they are. I can give details of my family doctor. A couple years ago, he made about $270,000 (the figures are released by the govenment). Out of that, he has to pay for his staff (2 nurses), his overhead of office space, supplies, etc. This is a very good GP with a large client base, and he's about average. He's told me he's had offers from the US for easily triple his take-home pay, with less hours (and his take-home would be taxed less). As he's a terrific GP, I'm just fortunate that he just prefers to live in Canada, but it's not hard to see why many GP's try to work in the US. I have no idea how specialists compare. - Dharmabum420 23:39, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 20

[edit] Self-replicating machines

Are there any examples or models of machines that can construct themselves? (A machine that once constructed can build a working model of itself which can thus repeat the process.) I'm assuming at least that the raw materials needed would be readily available. I can imagine how this might be possible on a very small scale, using the aid of natural forces for power and movement, but my mind starts to bend past that. freshgavin TALK 01:12, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

No, not in the Matrix sense. I think we are at the perpetual '20 years from that' stage, much like commercial fusion power. --Zeizmic 01:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Ask me by 2020, 2025 at the latest. Which is a firm date, and less than 20 years.
MSTCrow 04:07, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't implying the 'Matrix sense' or anything like that. I've read some interesting articles on it, specifying the basic parts a machine would be required to have in order to be able to create a copy of itself. Though it's a little beyond me (it's kind like of a combination of high level mechanics, organics, artificial intelligence design, and physics) I agree it does look like there's some sort of 'perpetual' 20 years in-the-future effect.

I was merely entertaining the thought that it would be rather cost effective to send a self-replicating robot with the ability to follow simple instructions and build structures as well as copies of itself to the polar caps of the moon using the materials it mines from beneath the surface. It also would probably be cost effective if they could build solar-panels but I have a feeling that you can't build that kind of stuff from raw materials on the moon! freshgavin TALK 04:39, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

See clanking replicator and nanotechnology for Wikipedia's take on the matter. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for a self-replicator, but "desktop manufacturing" is likely to become increasingly sophisticated over the coming decades. --Robert Merkel 04:41, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, clanking replicator is exactly what I was looking for. Turns out NASA did a comprehensive study for the exact thing I just mentioned in the 1980s. (Not only that, the article outlines that the materials for making solar cells are, in fact, supposed available on the moon.) freshgavin TALK 05:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I suppose a self-replicating robot is available today...provided it is supplied with two halfs of a robot and merely needs to plug the halfs togther. A robot that could assemble another from components down to chips and screws is a few decades off. A robot that could assemble another starting from mining the raw materials, smelting them, etc., might not be available for centuries. StuRat 05:55, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

A few months ago on tv I saw a system of blocks that were connected in a cluster of about six and that could move and click onto other blocks in such a way that after a while you had two clusters, identical to the first one. This was, however, extremely simple and very slow and the new blocks had to be placed in the right position for the cluster to pick them up (a typical assemblage issue that is one of the biggest problems in factory automation). But it's a start. There was also a webpage on this, but I can't find that now. DirkvdM 08:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
There have been quite a few tests similar to that, generally for the purpose of AI study. And StuRat, I think you're thinking too narrowly. Don't think of a big robot with arms that uses a solder gun and screws with its fingers; think of a robotic single-cell-size machine that can replicate in a mannar similar to that of organism where the raw materials are readily available. At that level the difference between a self-assembling robot and a self-replicating robot are almost negligable. freshgavin TALK 11:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

If you have time, try reading Prey by Michael Crichton. In that, nanobots are created that can kill things, break them down, and turn them into swarms of nanobots that can continue the cycle. In general, that would be the fear about anything self-replicating: it might not be stoppable, and it might be dangerous to us if you don't design it carefully. Not his best work, but not bad. Black Carrot 13:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Depending on your definition of machines, and whether it is acceptable that the children can do the same stuff but are not identical, you might review what goes on in the world of plands and animals with respect to the fact that they do reproduce themselves by having children that have children to infinity. Seriously, the nanotechnology, nanotube area is growing so rapidly, it is hard to keep up with all that is going on, but it seems to me is at a building blocks stage. Also look at the human genome project, and what that has done to biomedical research. User:AlMac|(talk) 04:26, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I was using the word 'machines' in the most general sense ... e.g. 'man-made'. I really think that we're not far away from creating 'working' nano-Cyanobacteria (basically have the ability to input, output, and multiply) or something similar, and once we can do that then everything else will come relatively quickly and it should be a really interesting time for science. freshgavin TALK 11:23, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, man, I'd have a great answer for this...we don't have self-replicating machines, but we do have self-repairing machines. A study was done somewhere about it...anyone have the link to that BBC article about the caterpllar thing that can fix itself? 12.72.244.198 12:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Direct domain

Is it possible to get a domain name direct from ICANN or IANA? --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 01:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

No, you need to go through a registrar. (Unless you're international organisation and are getting a .int domain name, in which case you would go directly to IANA. But I'm guessing you're not ;-) ) -- AJR | Talk 19:00, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] intelligent design

The intelligent design article is a little confusing re: capitalization. Even though "intelligent design" is lowercase within the article, it is uppercase in the title. I believe this is the result of technical limitations with the wiki software, as is the case with the iPod article. So, shouldn't there be a similar notice at the top of the page? If so, could someone add it? --JianLi 01:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

No, the capitalization is correct; "intelligent design" is ordinarily not capitalized inside a sentence, but the first "I" is capitalized when it is the first word of a sentence. These are the usual capitalization rules in English. The "technical limitations" notice applies only to names with invariant capitalization that would not be capitalized even at the start of a sentence. --Trovatore 01:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I see. Thanks --JianLi 02:28, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


Not really a question, just a related note: I came across an AP news article [79], which states "In a June article in the British Catholic magazine The Tablet, Coyne reaffirmed God's role in creation, but said science explains the history of the universe." I think the dating of the article as "June" is a mistake. The article in question is here, and has the date as "06/08/2005" or 6 August 2005. The mistake seems to stem from the difference between American/European dating conventions, which have reverse month/day orders (the aritcle was written in a British publication). --JianLi 02:33, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

That's why Wiki doesn't stick to either convention : ). freshgavin TALK 04:51, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Windows Mobile programming for free?

I'm wondering what free options there are for software development for the Pocket PC/Windows Mobile platform. The official Windows Mobile 5.0 SDK requires Visual Studio Standard Edition, which would set me back about $300. (Unfortunately, the free Express Edition doesn't include support for mobile devices.)

I know there are many free compilers and development environments for Palm OS, including a port of GCC, and I was rather surprised when a bit of Googling didn't turn up anything similar for Pocket PCs. There's Superwaba, but I'd much prefer to be able to compile native C code if possible. Any suggestions? —David Wahler (talk) 01:56, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Would the SDK by any chance function with the Express versions of the Studio applications?
MSTCrow 04:07, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately not--that was the first thing I checked. Thanks, though. —David Wahler (talk) 11:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What are microvesicles?

What are microvesicles?

google Vesicle (biology) Liposome David D. (Talk) 05:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Feeling kinda phlegmy

Ok, so my voice is really weird. I don't know what's up. It already changed once and now I think it might be changing again. It feels like my throat is full of flem and I've coughed up some but no matter how much theraflu I take I can't seem to clear it up at all. I got a small cough and my nose is a little runny but it's barely happening. This has been going on for like 3 days.

What can I do to clear up throat phlegm?

An expectorant is used to clear the throat of phlegm. I'm not sure if TheraFlu contains an expectorant or not. Also, bear in mind that phlegm in the throat is a symptom of a repiratory infection, so will go away when the condition causing it clears up, or shortly thereafter. StuRat 05:21, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
It seems like it would be better to ask a doctor for medical advice than a bunch of random people on a message board. Black Carrot 13:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
You don't need a doctor to tell you that an expectorant is used on a phlegm-producing cough. In the U.S., cough medicines marked with DM have dextromethorphan, which is a very good expectorant. Don't take the whole bottle unless you enjoy running from the purple bunnies. --Kainaw (talk) 15:45, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hydroxylapatite

The tooth enamel page states that tooth enamel is hydroxylapatite. The Hydroxylapatite article discusses how hydroxylapatite is sometimes used as a bone filling in some medical procedures. This begs the question (for me, anyway): Why isn't hydroxylapatite used as a dental filling? (I previously asked this question on the talk pages of dental filling and hydroxylapatite. Both articles would benefit from a mention of the answer, if anyone knows.) Regards - Tempshill 06:39, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

One thought that comes to mind is that tooth enamel wasn't tough enough to stand the conditions in the patients mouth, so something better is needed. StuRat 07:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Looks like hydroxylapatite compounds are used to me: [80] for example.GeeJo (t) (c) • 09:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, tooth enamel is predominantly composed of hydroxyapatite, with a minor amount of organic component. The reason it is not used as a restorative dental material is that it cannot be cast, pressed, or otherwise shaped into solid forms that can accurately fit the cavity of a tooth. It also cannot be placed and adapted into a cavity in a plastic state (as can, for example, dental amalgam).

It is unfortunate that hydroxyapatite cannot, at least with current technology, be used as a dental restorative material. Fillings made of this material would have many physical properties (strength, hardness, and coefficient of thermal expansion) that would make it ideal.

Hydroxyapatite (Calcitite) and other mineral bone analogues are used in bone grafting applications, but not primarily for their physical properties. It is more for their relatively high biocompatibility, and their ability to form a physical scaffold on which new bone can form and fill in. Unfortunately, there is no analogous process that occurs in teeth. When enamel is injured, it must be repaired with artificial materials-- it does not heal, as does bone.--Mark Bornfeld DDS 19:12, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] chemistry

are all compounds of carbon,hydrogen and oxygen(like sugar,glucose,etc.)sweet???why is it so?

thank you

Erm...no. Formaldehyde certainly isn't sweet, and neither (with some exceptions) are the other simple aldehydes, alcohols, carboxylic acids, ethers, etc. However, most sugars are. See Sweetness for the most prevalent theory regarding the causes. GeeJo (t) (c) • 09:44, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, humans are made largely of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen, and some of those aren't so sweet. (Then again, luckily, some are). DirkvdM 09:19, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Vinegar (ethanoic acid) is a good example. It consists of Carbon, Hydrogen and Oxygen, but no-one would ever say that it tastes sweet... smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 09:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Just to suggest that H,C,O doesn't imply organic compound, think of bicarbonates (HCO3). They aren't sweet. deeptrivia (talk) 14:44, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rabbit sex ratios

I'm trying to find information about the sex ratios of European rabbits. Normally I'd simply google rabbit "sex ratio" but because I'm at school our system keeps blocking this search term so I can't view the results! Please, if you have any information for me, provide reference links. Thank you. --195.194.74.92 10:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Try:
rabbit "gender ratio"
This will get by the censors and will also avoid studies on preferred sexual positions, practices, and orientations of rabbits, LOL. StuRat
Oddly enough, our school blocks everything but Google, so you can look at hardcore porn through the image search but can't reach an arcade site directly. It turns out, though, that -rabbit "sex ratio"- doesn't return anything out of the ordinary. 198.62.217.2 13:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
If you can get hold of the latest Economist, there is a really good article on the sex ratios of an endangered ground parrot. This brings in all the latest thoughts on the environmental impact on sex ratios, and would apply to most populations. --Zeizmic 14:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • That article's about the Kakapo of which there's only about 60 odd left. The conservationists had been endeavouring to boost reproduction by ensuring all females were well fed. Unfortunately this led to an excess of males being hatched (something like 60-40). The conservationists believe this is because healthy, well-fed males are more likely to produce many offspring. As their mothers are living in artifical abundence there's an incentive to produce male offspring. Now they're feeding the females just adequately and the offspring are closer to a 50-50 ratio. If this also applies to rabbits, then you'd expect to find a male-heavy population in times of abundent food. Lisiate 01:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
After Fibonacci, we know that rabbits only occur in pairs, so there must be the same amount of male and female rabbits. :) – b_jonas 16:09, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] O/I symbols for on and off on many electronic devices

You know the O/I symbols used for 'on' and 'off' on many electronic devices? An electrician recently told me that these originated from the German words aus and ein. This doesn't really make sense to me because, of course, aus doesn't start with and 'O', and ein doesn't start with an 'I'. Is this the real explanation? If not, do you know what the real explanation is?

Personally I just always assumed that it was a zero and a one. Since a power switch is Binary by nature it just seemed to make sense. It'd also be the most international way of indicating on and off. --BluePlatypus 15:07, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe it stands for an open or a closed loop? —Ruud 15:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I second the binary interpretation, anyone in computing knows 0 means off and 1 means on. If you interpreted 0 as a closed loop this would counter the fact that the 0 position represents an open loop. What I don't get is the icon starting to show up on more and more devices meaning 'on or off' that is a 0 with a 1 superimposed in the top of it. Does this have any more significant meaning beyond taking up less space compared to printing '0/1'?
Yes, the difference is that the 0 superimposed over the 1 means it's a toggle switch. Press it once to turn it on, press it again to turn it off - the button is both "on" and "off", while other two-way switches use the 0 for off and the 1 for on. —EatMyShortz 08:07, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Computers used to have jumper connectors. If you connected power to a jumper, it was written in the logic charts as a "1" (the numeric 'one'). If it was left unconnected, it was written as a "0" (the numeric 'zero'). Jumpers were great, but sometimes switches were used. Too much hardware and wiring, but the idea is the same. When the switch is on, it is a 1. When it is off, it is a 0. That has stuck. A 1 is on. A 0 is off. Of course, people keep having babies and those babies keep losing more and more of our history. So, they make up things, such as Americans getting the 1 and 0 from a similar appearance to I and O which have almost nothing to do with the German "aus" and "ein". --Kainaw (talk) 15:41, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, in German ein can mean either "on" or "one". ("Ein, zwei, drei, ...") Me, I had also heard that there was some connection to the German, but it might be an urban legend or some other kind of pernicious false meme. Steve Summit (talk) 02:52, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Both BluePlatypus and Rund are correct. These labels are usually found on what might be considered a "toggle switch" (meaning basicall a two position switch). Answers.com defines a "toggle switch" as "A switch that uses a toggle joint with a spring to open or close an electric circuit as an attached lever is pushed through a small arc." Binary numbers are just a collection of open and closed circuits. The closed circuit would correspond to a binary "1", and an open circuit would correspond t a binary "0". Nowadays, as "digital" culture becomes pervasive, you may even find these labels carrying over to other places, such as on a software button that is meant to convey the idea of a toggle switch. There is no connection to the German language, or to any language other than that of logic and binary. Johntex\talk 15:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi Kainaw - thanks for the good bit of history! I had almost forgotten about jumper switches myself. I think that the 0/1 superimposition is used primarily for switches that are push-button. As you look at the device, if we consider the x axis to be left-right side, the y axis to be the top-bottom, and the z axis to be towards-away from you - there may be a push-button power switch that moves only in the z dimension. It would be difficult to label the two seperate positions since they are "in" and "out". Therefore, the two symbols are combined into one symbol to show that the switch still has those two states, even though it would be difficult to label them seperately. Johntex\talk 15:53, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
The electrician probably meant that the Germand words 'aus' and 'ein' were translated into English, as 'out' and 'in', which do start with 'O' and 'I'. DirkvdM 09:35, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course the 'ein' meaning 'one' doesn't hack because 'aus' doesn't mean 'two'. And, by the way, 'ein' can mean 'in', 'a/an' or 'one', but 'one' can also be 'eins' and I don't really know when which is used ("eins, zwei, drei, vier" would sound the same and I really think that that is what is said when marching). DirkvdM 09:45, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I think it is a straight line and a circle. Typographically, the letter O and digit zero are not true circles except in some very stylized fonts; if it were the letter or digit we'd see more variation. I think they represent some electrical stylization. Notinasnaid 23:21, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree, I'm not sure this one is solved. This was apparently a long-recurring question on the Usenet group alt.folklore.computers [81], including the urban legend about ein and aus. For my two cents, it is very clear that the symbol is normally a straight line and a perfect circle represented. In Boolean algebra we have the empty set ∅ and the set containing the empty set {∅} which I believe Boole simplified as I in his texts. In a Binary numeral system we use the Arabic numerals 0 and 1. But this is neither of these. There must be another explanation. The first quick-break electrical switch was invented by J.H. Holmes in 1884 (lovely picture here). Is it possible that the representation came from the operation of this sort of switch? (The | representing the key in the switch, the O representing the absence of the key?) Is it possible that there is some CE, UL, or ISO documentation on this? KWH

[edit] Identifying prescription medication by imprint

I had a Hydrocodone/Apap 7.5/500 prescription filled at CVS, and received tablets with "M358" imprinted on them. Is this the correct imprint for these tablets? I can't find this information through a Google search, because apparently I am the only person on the internet who *already has* Lortab. I wanted to make sure that the dosage was correct.

Your local library will probably have a copy of the Physician's Desk Reference. Rmhermen 17:50, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
According to my drug guide here, M358 on a white oblong pill is Hydrocodone/Acetaminophen 7.5/500 by Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals. --Kainaw (talk) 21:14, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GPS on an aircraft

Does anyone know if it's ok to use a regular hand-held GPS receiver on a commercial aircraft? And would it work properly? Thanks --Shantavira 19:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I've used mine, it's hilarious. It doesn't transmit and is no worse than a laptop, so you don't have it on during takeoffs and landings. --Zeizmic 20:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
How come it doesn't transmit? enochlau (talk) 23:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
What would you expect it to transmit? It's a receiver, like a radio or television. — Knowledge Seeker দ 23:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but for many years you were (and for all I know still are) forbidden to use ordinary AM and FM radio receivers on airplanes. If I remember correctly, this was because of the possibility that the oscillators in the superheterodyne circuits in those radios could, under certain circumstances, radiate enough RF energy to interfere with the plane's own radio signals. I doubt that a GPS receiver has that potentiality, but I can't rule it out, and for someone who remembers that they're not supposed to use radios on airplanes, it would be a reasonable conclusion to believe that GPS receivers are verboten, too. Steve Summit (talk) 02:43, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Certainly. I was replying to the question immediately above my comment, not the original question. — Knowledge Seeker দ 05:42, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
That's assuming you don't mean 'use it for actually navigating the aircraft'. That's a whole different ballgame. DJ Clayworth 21:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually the GPSers with straps for bicycles will fit right onto the frame of many ultralight aircraft. My father got one last year for his. I suppose you could use velcro to attach the other kind. Rmhermen 01:15, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

They really need to add enough shielding to wires in aircraft so they can be confidant they won't be so fragile as to be taken out by a cell phone or GPS unit. If they can't take those weak signals, what hope do they have of surviving an electrical storm or a solar flare ? StuRat 04:35, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

The article GPS says that you can use them on airplanes. It doesn't present a simple explanation on how the receivers work. We need a 'GPS for the Happily Ignorant'. :) --Zeizmic 14:25, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I just travelled on a Continental Airlines flight, and I seem to recall the inflight magazine listing GPS among things that can be turned on once airborne. On a related note, I observe an iPod is never truly off, as it responds to a touch and the battery is not removable...isn't it still a live device at all times...? Notinasnaid 23:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 21

[edit] Floating on air gas

In the aerogel article, it says newer forms of silica aerogel have a density of 1.9 mg/cm3, which, if I have done my math correctly, is 1.9 kg/m3. On the carbon dioxide page, it lists CO2 as having a density of 1.98 kg/m3 at 298K (25C). Does this mean that solid aerogel would float on carbon dioxide, or have I misstepped somewhere? --Superiority 10:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Sounds right to me. Your "floating on air" title isn't right, though, since CO2 is only around 1% of the content of air. StuRat 10:24, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Now, how porous are these extremely low-density aerogels? If you immerse them in (for example) carbon dioxide, won't all the pores fill in with CO2, increasing the net density of your block of aerogel? (Of course, with a large slab this process might take a while—moving a block of aerogel from air to something like argon, the block would float for a while until enough air was replaced by the heavier gas.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:54, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
The article says that aerogels are extremely good conductive insulators because they don't allow circulation so the pores shouldn't be able fill with CO2 (must consist of sealed cells). Rmhermen 04:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Yea, I'm picturing closed cells, like Styrofoam. Is that considered an aerogel ? StuRat 06:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, in that case, I presume it would be possible to gain a large enough quantity of it such that, supported only by a layer of carbon dioxide, a human could walk around on it? --Superiority 14:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CSS - making background images partially transparent

I want to make the background image of a div partially transparent with the opacity: thingy. The problem is that when I apply this to the div, it makes the bloody text transparent, while the background image is as opaque as ever. Is there a way to get around this? Johnleemk | Talk 13:15, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Use a PNG image with alpha channel, so it's semi-transparent. This would be even more compatible than the opacity option in CSS, which is out of the current standards. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 03:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
IE doesn't support alpha channel PNGs, and the only way I know to get around this is to *sigh* go back to CSS. Johnleemk | Talk 04:33, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, I'd just say "Too bad for IE users". Most browsers DO support PNG transparency and will show it up right, but only IE will fail on this. Alternatively, your opacity property won't be supported by most of other browsers, so it's really all IE's fault. But there are IE fixes that make PNG transparency work, not sure if the full 8 bit alpha channel though.
On a side note, if you make it two divs, one for the background and the other one (inside the last) just for the text, and use the opacity + png transparency method on the bg one, it should work in most cases. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 05:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Physiology

Why does a bag of intravenous 0.9% normal saline have a pH of 5.0?

  • Is it? Where did you get the information? See pH and Acidity. I can't help if you want to know which ions are involved. - Mgm|(talk) 20:10, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
  • What? The article Normal saline indicates it only contains salt, so it should be neutral. The physiological pH range for blood plasma is about 7.35-7.45. Injecting something with pH 5.0 into the bloodstream is insane. I don't believe that value. --BluePlatypus 20:50, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Comment: Salt doesn't necessarily imply a pH value of 7.0. If it's common salt, yes! deeptrivia (talk) 21:00, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Read the article. --BluePlatypus 21:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
An aqueous solution with a pH of 5 is only very slightly acidic; ISTR that standing water can reach that value just by absorbing CO2 from the air, though I'm not sure about that. It represents one gram mole of a monobasic acid in 100,000 liters of water. I imagine the bloodstream has buffers that will easily swamp that out, so it's probably not an issue medically (but I'm not a biologist or medical doctor, so this info comes with no warranty). --Trovatore 21:05, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
"slightly acidic" in chemistry terms, not in physiological terms. Acidosis occurs below pH 7.35 and you think pH 5.0 is safe? Hardly, try doing the math. pH is logarithmic. Assuming no buffers (which is wrong, but still) with 7 liters of blood at pH 7.35, 0.1 liters of pH 5 solution will bring that down to pH 6.7. And then you're dead. --BluePlatypus 21:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
You're missing the point. If your blood reaches a pH of 5, you're in trouble, no doubt. What I'm saying is, the introduction of an unbuffered aqueous solution having that pH into the blood will probably have very little effect on blood pH, because blood is, I assume, buffered. (Using more weasel words than usual because it's not my field and I certainly wouldn't want anyone to rely on these speculations.) --Trovatore 21:27, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
  • True, blood has a pH 7.35-7.45. But a bag of intravenous saline has a pH of 5.0, as indicated on the bag itself. One explanation I can suggest is Stewart's physicochemical principle, and that the strong ions (sodium and chloride) cause dissociation of water, increasing the free hydrogen concentration, and thus lowering pH (since pH is the log of the H+ concentration). Injecitng into blood will cause a slight acidosis as the strong ion difference is reduced (due to the equal sodium and chloride concentrations) - but the body will compensate for this. Patients injected with saline do not become acidotic, unless the mechanism is interfered with (i.e. regular saline infusions over days and days).
This is my theory - I have not come across literature to explain this. --80.42.73.89 21:51, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
But that doesn't seem to fit common sense to me. I could perhaps accept the fact that the blood may be able to buffer the thing. But why not provide a drip at blood pH to begin with? It seems like a completely unnecessary stress on the body, which is the last thing someone with an IV drip needs. --BluePlatypus 23:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
There are more 'physiological' pH solutions, such as Hartmans (6.5), colloids such as gelofusine etc - it depends on the application. Even stored blood becomes acidic! Acid/Base in the body is still very much a work-in-progress, I think medicine/science has yet to understand even a tenth of the subject. To have a solution with a blood, or rather, extracellular pH would be hard to make as all individuals are different, and all the things that give us a 'pH' - ions, carbon dioxide, undetermined acids/bases etc, for all the different clinical situations that are encountered, would be impossible.

Actually, pH regulation in human beings is understood pretty well. There are no major "unsolved mysteries" or "big questions" remaining. NS has a pH of 5 off the shelf, but is quickly and easily buffered by the human body as it is infused. Blue Platypus was trying to reason it out but was working with several wrong assumptions about volume of diffusion and buffering capacity of blood and body tissues. There are iv solutions designed to mitigate (or not exacerbate) acidosis (such as lactated Ringer's solution), but there are very few clinical situations where you could detect an advantage. Also note that there is a lot of quackery out there about how the body handles acids and acidic foods that is pure nonsense. alteripse 18:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I still share BP's curiosity, though: Is normal saline actually titrated to a pH of 5? If so, why? Granting that the amount of acid is physiologically irrelevant, still, surely it must have some purpose or it wouldn't be there. --Trovatore 18:41, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it is intentionally titrated to pH of 5. I think that just happens to be what you get when you make up the commercial products (which date to the first half of the 20th century) and no one has ever considered it a significant enough problem to adapt any of the proposed replacements widely. I omitted these speculations from my previous answer because they are speculations, and I may be wrong. I do have a high level of confidence in the reliability of the paragraph above. alteripse 18:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problem with SVG format

When I upload Image:deeptrivia.svg, it comes out to be blank. But on Inkscape, it just appears fine. I have tried both plain svg and inkscape svg formats. Even when I redownload the uploaded image and open it on inkscape, it appears fine. The image should look like Image:deeptrivia.png. What is going wrong? deeptrivia (talk) 20:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Start with the obvious: Does your browser support SVG images? --BluePlatypus 20:53, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Sure. It does. Could you see anything on clicking on Image:deeptrivia.svg ? deeptrivia (talk) 20:58, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
With Firefox 1.0.6, it doesnt show up. Have you considered simply uploading it in a different file format? GeeJo (t) (c) • 21:18, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, Image:deeptrivia.png. But I'd like it to be scalable. deeptrivia (talk) 21:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I see a white rectangle, which is also what Firefox shows when viewing the SVG file directly, and also what I see when I open the file in Inkscape. Are you sure you uploaded the correct version? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:24, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Strange, because I again downloaded the file (saved with a different name of course) and opened it in Inkscape, and it again shows correctly! Could it be because I'm using a font to write in an ancient script, which would not be available on your computer? deeptrivia (talk) 21:30, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
The problem is almost certainly because you're using a font that Wikipedia's SVG renderer doesn't have, and for which it can't make a reasonable substitution. Note that whether your browser supports SVG is irrelevant; Wikipedia doesn't send your browser an SVG, it rasterises it into a PNG - and in order to rasterise text it has to have either the exact font you specify or a compatible fallback. The offending line in the SVG is "font-family:brahmi lipi rabison", and I think mediawiki doesn't have access to any of those fonts. There is a solution. You can't embed a font in an SVG, but you can convert the characters from a text object into a vector. Do that with path->object_to_path. Note that this means you'll be including the shapes of the glyphs themselves into the file you upload to wikipedia (rather than just a few chars of unicode text and a font name). You can only do that if the font you're using is licenced under a Wikipedia-compatible licence; as a derivative work, the SVG this process will produce will be licenced under that licence too. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:56, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks a ton! That worked. I don't know what license the font has, but I downloaded it for free from the internet. deeptrivia (talk) 22:09, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Then you must assume it's not safe to use. —Keenan Pepper 22:17, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I've emailed the creator of the font regarding the matter. deeptrivia (talk) 22:38, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Sourceforge has a GPL Brahmi font at [82]. Whether GPL and GFDL are compatible licences is a matter above my paygrade. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:42, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Incidentally you image looks bad on a non-white background. That's because there's a big white rectangle stuck to it, near the bottom. Ungroup, delete the white rectangle, and save. It looks like you were trying to have a white background, but really that's not necessary, and Mediawiki's SVG renderer will correctly render the transparent SVG background to a transparent area of the resulting PNG. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:48, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I made that change. It seems the sourceforge fonts are for modern scripts based on the Brahmi script. deeptrivia (talk) 22:56, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] most enzymes are...

are most enzymes lipids, phospholipids, proteins, or carbohydrates?

Look at the first sentence five words of Enzyme. —Keenan Pepper 22:14, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

oh, sorry, i must have missed that, thanks. --Herzog 22:16, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Interesting question. What I'd want to know is if most enzymes are proteins, which ones aren't? :) --BluePlatypus 23:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
All enzymes are proteins by definition. There are non-protein catalysts, though, including some RNAs and metals (e.g. platinum). --David Iberri (talk) 23:14, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
It was a rhetorical question. --BluePlatypus 23:21, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Really? I completely missed that. In any case, maybe someone will find the info useful. --David Iberri (talk) 17:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Danger in dissembling electronic devices?

I enjoy dissembling certain types of electronics, both just to see what the insides look like, and to try to learn more about how they work. I notice that on many devices it says something to the effect of "danger risk of electric shock if opened". I haven't been electrocuted by any of them yet, but I'm wondering if there is really any danger. If there is, how can I tell which parts(including wires) are safe to touch/disconnect and which ones aren't? Flea110 22:58, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Capacitors store electric charge, and they are dangerous to touch, as well as anything connected to them. I've got to say though: If you need to ask, then you probably shouldn't be doing it. Perhaps you should start with some simple home-electronics kits and books before you start cracking open unknown electronic devices. Once you open that thing there is nothing in there that indicates 'this part is dangerous'. Not only that, but parts which are supposed to be safe may not be. (I've gotten shocks from things that should have been grounded) So even knowledge isn't a catch-all. And whatever you do, don't open a TV, monitor or other form of CRT. Those things have enough juice stored in them when they're off to kill you. --BluePlatypus 23:15, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
And especially don't open a defibrillator! hydnjo talk 23:20, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
What sort of "simple home-electronics kits and books" do you mean? Can you give me some examples? Flea110 23:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
This magazine website should give some indication of what hobby electronics constructors get up to. --Robert Merkel 00:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Well there are all kinds of beginners and hobbyist books and magazines on electronics (See above, or just check your local bookstore, or an online one). As for kits, I've heard good things about Ramsey. They've got electronics kits for all kinds of stuff, including beginner ones which teach the basics. There are others too, just look in some hobbyist magazines or catalogs, or search online. --BluePlatypus 01:14, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Dissembling electronic devices can be very dangerous. Some people think they swung the election to Bush in Ohio. Or they can just be annoying. Take my bathroom scale, the lying son of an adding machine.... --Trovatore 01:25, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

It might be obvious to most, but just in case...

  • Always unplug any electronic device and remove any batteries before working on it.
  • Let it sit for a long time to ensure most capacitors will have discharged. StuRat 06:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Also, keep in mind that disassembling things tends to void warranties. Remember the difference between a geek and a normal person is thus: when the warranty expires, a normal person says, "Ah, it's going to break now," whereas a geek says, "Sweet, I can take it apart!" Cernen Xanthine Katrena 07:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 22

[edit] Attention Deficit Disorder?

I am a sophmore in college. I can't remember when the last time was that I concentrated on school work, while completely sober, for more than two hours at once. Most of my major papers and tests are handled with the aid of amphetamines (which I only use approximately once a month). However, I can concentrate on things that I am enjoying for extended periods of time. For example, I did exceptionally well in high school debate and I can read a good book for a few hours. Is there a chance that I have ADD? What can I do that might help me to concentrate on school work? Thanks for the help!

See a doctor. We unfortunately are not in a position to provide diagnoses. enochlau (talk) 00:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually a psychiatrist would be better for that kind of diagnosis. But you can check out the article on ADHD, or see the ASRS symptom checklist. (Note that the checklist results do not constitute a diagnosis.) But from what you've said here, I don't think it sounds like you've got it, though. In my experience ADHD is far more extreme, where you'd either be unable to concentrate for more than ten minutes, or you'd be 'hyperconcentrating' and completely lost for hours on end. Not being able to concentrate on things you find boring is normal, what really defines ADHD (in my subjective, non-expert opinion) is that those with it cannot concentrate on the things they do find interesting. --BluePlatypus 00:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
In the United States at least, a psychiatrist is a doctor, although the converse of course is not necessarily true. — Knowledge Seeker দ 01:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Two hours isn't bad at all. Just take a break every two hours, then get back into it. If that doesn't work, try spreading the studying and work over several days, and alternate subects to keep from getting bored to death. StuRat 06:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Coming from someone who has ADHD himself, I can tell you that ADHD is comparable to not being able to focus and at the same time being excited about everything. ADD is a little more like apathy, only you do care, but not enough not to change subjects every six seconds. ^_^ Cernen Xanthine Katrena 08:10, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

you dont sound like you have ADD, you just are bored and slack off when you dont really care about something or it bores you. ADD isnt just not being able to pay attention for extended periods.

[edit] Need Help Identifying Plants

I'm no botanist, just a photographer. I request help in identifying the four pictures I have uploaded to the commons, which can be found on my Photography Page. Please feel free to label, categorize, or use any of these images if you can help me. Thanks in advanced. M@$+@ Ju ~ ♠ 01:10, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] lasers

Hello, Would you tell me what type of portable laser could be used to cut through ice but not harm people and not be effected by metal. I'm looking for type and power level. I suppose solid state and a moderate power level would work. I'm picturing like a saw with the beam going between 2 points andcutting the ice as it moves through it. Thanks. Scott

I would be afraid that ice would reflect or refract enough laser light to cause eye damage. StuRat 06:16, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Seems a tricky and exceedingly complex and expensive way to cut through ice. You'd probably get excellent results with a thin wire extended between two points. Just get this wire constantly hot and it'll do the job very well. My best idea would be getting a wire of a material with great electrical resistance and letting a current go through it, but if you're willing to try that, you'd better be extremely cautious to not cause a short circuit, not get yourself electrocuted and just really understand that electricity can kill you. :P ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 03:25, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Too uneconomical, sorry we can't help you write your science fiction novel :( -- Mac Davis ☢ ญƛ. 09:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, as others have pointed out it seems to be a heck of an inefficient way of cutting ice, but to answer your question, you'd need a laser categorised as a class IV ("typically more than 500 mW if cw, or 10 J/cm2 if pulsed") under the categorisation system. You can find the description in the laser safety article. --Noodhoog 20:34, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I would say in both cases (imparting energy via a laser at a wavelength which ice absorbs, or using a heated wire) it seems to me that the ice, converted to water by the heat, would have a high likelyhood of refreezing soon after the passage of the laser beam/wire (depending on ambient temperature). KWH

[edit] Tail Spin - More information?

Not sure if I have the terminology correct--tail spin--but where can I find more information about it? My understanding is that when a jet-based aircraft stays at the same horizontal position and spins about the vertical axis towards the ground, it's referred to as a tail spin. Last I heard, there was no direct known cause, and there were mysteries surrounding recovery from such a situation. Where can I find more information about it? --24.231.16.6 03:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, you can start with spin (flight). --Anon, 03:45, January 22.
Very cool; thanks, I just got my terminology mixed up. --24.231.16.6 05:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

The term is also used for any "steady downward spiral", such as the collapse of Enron. StuRat 06:09, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Another cute name that is related is 'Death Spiral' [83] --Zeizmic 13:10, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Web Page Color

This page's background color is blue in Internet Explorer but black in Firefox. Why? Gerard Foley 04:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, while people are there, any comments (good or bad) about the design of the page and how to improve it? Thanks, Gerard Foley 04:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Near the top of the HTML code you have: bgcolor= "pics/sky blue bg". You should use just the number code or the name (bgcolor="blue") of the color you want. --jh51681 05:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I saw that line, but how does it work? Gerard Foley 05:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Don't use bgcolor, use style="background: blue url(path/filename.ext)" ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 05:45, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I just don't understand what bgcolor= "pics/sky blue bg" does. Gerard Foley 06:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Nothing, AFAIK, since that's incorrect code. Correct code would be bgcolor="blue" or bgcolor="#0000FF". "pics/sky" is not a valid "color", so browsers will respond to it differently. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 09:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
But that still doesn't explain why some browsers make the background blue, such as Konqueror (Mozilla makes it black). http://www.thebiosoundmethod.com/pics/sky blue bg doesn't exist (tried various punctuations too). Do they pick up the 'blue' bit and ignore the rest? DirkvdM 10:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
It's rather simple:
  • Konqueror gets the bgcolor argument as a series of words "pics/sky" "blue" and "bg". It goes through them until it finds a valid argument. In this case, this would be "blue".
  • Firefox gets only the first word, since the HTML standard says bgcolor only has one parameter. Since "pics/sky" is not a color, it think it has to fill the value in with some standard base color, which in this case is black.
  • Other browser may treat "pics/sky" as an actual color argument and depending of the algorithm, they'd present different colors.
  • And at last, some browsers will just ignore it as invalid and use the default background color. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 22:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Ҡieff. Gerard Foley 03:19, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
As crude as the site is, I actually kind of like it, and like the navigation at the bottom of the page. Where it says "Biosound method way to reduce stress" and that paragraph, you should make the font size a bit smaller. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mac Davis (talk • contribs).
<shock> You like it!? You're joking right? Gerard Foley 07:45, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
FWIW, it shows up in blue on Safari as well. And I don't like the large type. It makes me think that quantity (size of the text) is trying to make up for a lack of quality (what the text actually says). Dismas|(talk) 14:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] schizosaccharomyces pombe

Hello, I am just an average guy who enjoys home distilling as a hobby. I have done a little research about yeast strains, a little mind you. I was wondering where I could purchase a strain of schizosaccharomyces pombe yeast. If you know of any sites that I could make such a purchase I would be most appreciative. Thank you for your time and effort in advance. Patrick Kelty.

My first Google hit. Avoid the mutant strains if you want to brew. --JWSchmidt 05:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Refutations of Arguments Against the Multiverse Hypothesis

I am going to give some counter-arguments refuting the arguments many people have made against the theory of Parallel Universes:

First, I've heard that the theory of Parallel Universes isn't very scientific.But just because a particular belief,idea or guess isn't scientific doesn't mean it's not true, or it can't be true.Look at all those religions and religious beliefs in the world.Those beliefs which many of the religions in the world are based on or teach aren't very scientific, but that doesn't mean that they're not true!! I've heard some creationists say that the theory of Parallel Universes can not explain why the Universe has the conditions,physical laws and physical constants needed for life to exist, because there's no evidence to prove it.Actually, things are the other way round.The fact is, there is evidence to prove it is true because it explains very well why the Universes has the fine-tune conditions needed for life exist.After all, people have also said the theory of intelligent design is not true because of that sort of stuff.

There's a name for that theory, but I can't quite say it... "Of course the universe is the way it is, if it was any other way we wouldn't be here to see it". Tzarius
I wouldn't call it a theory, it's quite obvious that if the universe couldn't support life then we wouldn't be here to see it. Therefore, any universe we can observe must be capable of supporting life. I suppose you could call this a biased sample. Since we can only sample universes capable of sustaining life, we get a very biased view of what the typical universe looks like. StuRat 07:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Just now I found the correct search terms - it's the Anthropic principle. Tzarius 08:22, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Second, I've that the Multiverse hypothesis is not true because some scientists say that it's inevitable that the Universe turned out the way it is.Are they saying they know the reason why the Universe is the way it is, with all those physical laws,rules,principles and constants?First, isn't that pretty arrogant?Second, what is reason they know that the Universe is the way it is?If they don't know why the Universe has the laws and physical constants that it has, then they shouldn't make such an arrogant claim!!

Doesn't matter what theory you're talking about. You can argue everything down to the basic "But why?" and the scientific method cannot provide the answer. Tzarius
Also note that religion comes down to unanswereable questions, too. Where did God come from ? Why does he care about us insignificant mortals ? Etc. StuRat 07:00, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Third, I've heard that the exist of many universes raises the question of whether virtual worlds generated by conputers and virtual reality should be counted among them.The existence of other universes means the existence of places and areas of space that you cannot reach no matter how far travel across the Universes.So the virtual worlds contains virtual objects, and are generated by computer or VR, are virtual or 'imaginary' Parallel Universes.

Sure. There could well be an infinite number of other universes, unreachable by any means from this one. But since they can't possibly affect this universe, they can be safely ignored. Tzarius

Fourth, I've heard that the Multiverse hypothesis violates Occam's Razor.By making such a theory, you then have to explain why different universes have different physical laws and constants.First, the Multiverse hypothesis is the simplest explanation!Intelligent design is far more complicated.Second, many theories have parts of them which unexplained when they were first made.For example, Newton's theory of gravity didn't explain why gravity exists.And even when the general theory of relativity explained it as a distortion of space time, that didn't explain why matter distorts spacetime.And when Darwin's theory of evoltuion was made, it at first didn't explain why different animals have differentlevels of survival ability in the first place or how living things originated in the first place.Third, as to what other universes might be like, that's very interesting.Who knows?One of them might even be like the world of Narnia in the story, the Chronicles of Narnia. Please tell the people who have been arguing against the multiverse hypothesis about my refutations or counter-arguments!!!!

Any theory must be supported by observation or mathematical calculations and preferably both. Those theories you listed were all supported by observation first. There may be some support for the parallel universe theory as observations of double slit experiments seem to show interference between photons even when only one is launched at the slits at a time. One explanation is that photons from parallel universes are causing the interference. There may also be some support in the math, as one interpretation of the wave probability function is that it predicts the probability that a wave packet will be in a given universe at a given time. StuRat 07:34, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
By your own admission, the parallel universes theory "isn't very scientific". If it cannot be proven or disproven, then it does not belong in Science, and will remain on the fringes of fancy. Tzarius 06:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I believe it is a scientific theory, which can be tested and proven or disproven. At present, there is only limited proof to support it, so it should be considered only a possibility. If more evidence supports it in the future, then it may become more of a mainstream theory. StuRat 07:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
As far as I am aware, there is currently no way for us to distinguish between any of the Interpretations of quantum mechanics. Each one avoids some of the problems, but also comes with its own baggage. I remember reading about a proposal for using a variation of the Double-slit experiment to attempt to prove the many worlds interpretation, but I can't find any references at the moment. --GraemeL (talk) 14:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Double-slit experiment#The_thought_experiment does get close when it talks about applying the wave probability function of Quantum Mechanics to individual photons, but it does stop short of suggesting that the photons may simultaneously exist in many linked universes, some of which have it going thru the left slit and some of which have it going thru the right slit. StuRat 09:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] inductor

want 2 know about the properties of the inductor

Perhaps you didn't realize this, but this is actually an encyclopedia where you can answer most questions yourself using the handy search bar along the left side of your screen. Type in "inductor", press "Go", and marvel at the wonder that is modern technology. --David Iberri (talk) 07:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fillings

I'm not looking for medical advice here, just someone to blame. (It'll probably end up being me.) What can cause an amalgam filling to crack? I'd love to think it was my dentist doing a sh*tty job, but one can only be so hopeful. Cernen Xanthine Katrena 08:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[84] Here you go, a bit for you to read. :smile: -- Mac Davis ญƛ. 09:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Biting on hard candy. Happened to me once (while at a festival abroad - very inconvenient). It was an old filling. But I suppose that your crack (no pun) was not in an old filling (still no pun) and didn't have such an obvious cause, because else you wouldn't have asked. In other words, did it crack 'just like that'? DirkvdM 10:10, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
You're all getting old. :) --Zeizmic 13:05, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Fillings crack for the same reason other things crack: the forces to which they are exposed exceed their compressive or tensile strength. This could indeed be partially the dentist's fault, if he selects a filling material that is inappropriate to the situation. For example, the use of dental amalgam in a setting where a full crown is more suitable might be considered unrealistically optimistic. However, this type of treatment compromise is made all the time, for the sake of economy. And as often is the case, a short-term economy eventually leads to extra expense if the selected material is not sufficiently durable.

Fillings also crack when they either become weakened or are subjected to abnormally high forces. For example:

  • when you chew on them too soon after being placed, and before they have fully solidified (this can initiate cracks that do not become manifest until sometime later);
  • as a result of metallurgical work-hardening over years of loyal service;
  • as a result of an undermining of their support by decay that extends under the fillings;
  • as a result of sudden, unexpected high-magnitude forces-- such as encountering a pitted prune, date, or olive that wasn't pitted;
  • as a result of inappropriate of non-functional tooth use, such as habitual tooth clenching/grinding, chewing on ice cubes, etc.

So, either the patient, the doctor, or plain dumb luck may be responsible for structural failure of a filling.--Mark Bornfeld DDS 15:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah! A dentist doth respondeth! Mine own eyes art stunned at thy brevity! Er...I mean...thank you all, you have been extraordinarily helpful. I do tend to eat ice cubes, and it wouldn't surprise me if my dentai insurance wasn't going to cover a crown, so he did an amalgam filling to save me money (of course, it wound up costing me over three hundred dollars anyway...). At least now I know I can blame us both. Thanks again. Cernen Xanthine Katrena 10:57, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Windows XP Pro activation

I have the OEM version of Windows XP Pro installed on my current computer which I built myself. But I've just bought some new kit to build a replacement computer (new case, CPU, motherboard , VGA card and SATA hard-drives), because my current set-up is a bit tired. I plan to migrate everything from the old computer to the new one and re-use my existing version of Windows, but during the time of migration I expect that both computers will be in use until I retire the old set-up. I know there's a 45 day period where you don't have to activate Windows, but am I right in saying that I need to activate it in order to download the hotfixes etc? If I try to activate Windows on the new computer will it work or will it fail or will my old computer stop working because it think that I've got a pirated version? MrMcarthy

From what I understand, an OEM version of Windows XP is tied to the computer that it was bought with, which is why they are sold at a discount compared to the retail versions. So, no I don't think it will activate on the new computer. Ignoring that, you should be able to install hotfixes regardless of whether it has been activated or not - the Update service will only lock you out if you have a serial number that's known to be pirated. enochlau (talk) 11:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
If you activate it by calling Microsoft, you should be put through to a human if the activation fails, so you can explain the situation and (hopefully) get the activation code. They were quite reasonable when I went through that with Office XP - although that wasn't an OEM version, so that might make a difference. --Pidgeot (t) (c) (e) 14:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
You generally can't move an OEM copy of Windows to a new machine without breaking the terms of the license. The OEM copy was sold at a discount on the understanding that it goes to landfill with the computer. This is actually one reason why it is almost always cheaper to buy a new machine with Windows loaded than you can make one and install legal software: the OEM license cost the manufacturer much less than you could buy Windows at retail. (Note that sites offering "OEM software" in single copies are almost always selling pirate software). Notinasnaid 19:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Origin of the brand name "Asus"

Hi, our article about ASUSTeK claims that the "brand name 'ASUS' originated from the word 'Pegasus'", which is something I haven't found any reference for on the web. Could someone point me to a reliable source for this or for the real origin? Thanks --Gennaro Prota 12:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Well, I found a reference on the web here saying ASUS used to be Pegasus (as in the flying-horse of Greek Mythology) but had to change their name in many countries for Trademark purposes. So they dropped the "Peg".. It's a second-hand account, but it's such a trivial thing that I don't see any reason to doubt it, lest someone from ASUS themselves says something. --BluePlatypus 21:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Wow, thanks! This renewed my hopes to find something through search engines, so I also tried Yahoo!, Altavista and others :) Finally I came up to this two articles, which I translated with the online Babel Fish service:
If you do so as well you will discover that, yes, the name is said to derive from "Pegasus", however the "official explanation" for dropping "peg" seems to be that they wanted their name to be "high" in alphabetical listings (sic!). Wikipedia, of course, shall only report verifiable information so I think I'll add the two links above to our article (plus the Babel Fish URL). Thanks again, Gennaro Prota 12:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ability to walk

what is the reason behind our ability to walk??is it friction or newton's third law of motion(every action has an equal and opposite reaction) thank you andrea

This sounds like homework! But surely both of them have a role, since without friction it would be like walking on ice, and without Newton's Third Law, you'd sink into the ground since it wasn't pushing back. And there must be countless other physical laws involved (Hooke's Law on the tendons in your legs, Ohm's Law for the electric current from your brain etc.) smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 16:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Ehm, that 'electic current' is really a succession of chemical reactions, I believe, so I'm not sure Ohm would have anything to say on this. The neuron article says it's electric, but from neurotransmitter I understand that both can be true at the same time. DirkvdM 09:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Douglas Adams once said (I'm pretty sure it was him ... correct me on this?) in a similar arrangement of words: Walking is merely the ability to catch yourself while you fall forward at a consistant rate. So from that you could assume Newton's first and third were most important, although pretty much every law of fundamental physics is involved in some form or another! freshgavin TALK 23:36, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Calculating a molecule's electronegativity

Ditto. How do I do that? I didn't find anything useful on the electronegativity page and with a wikipedia search. Whitetigah 15:03, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Well for Mulliken electronegativities, it's right there. For Pauling's, see his book The nature of the chemical bond. --BluePlatypus 19:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
For a molecule you probably want an electrostatic potential map which gives you an idea of the charge distribution around the molecule. Potential maps of molecules tend to be dotted around chemistry textbooks and look something like this. These are usually calculated on computers using mathematical models that are developed by theoretical chemists. Accuracy, of course, depends on the model you choose and the computing time you wish to spend on the problem. Is not convenient to calculate these by hand at all, even for the simplest molecules. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 22:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] capacitor

should capacitor be used only in ac circuits? if so why do most dc circuits have capacitors? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.1.217.105 (talk • contribs).

I'm not an expert on the subject, but I see no reason why capacitors should be used in AC circuits but not DC circuits. In fact, capacitors can be used in both types of circuit. Perhaps someone experienced in the topic will stop by soon to give you a better answer; for now, you might read up on the subject at our article on capacitors. --David Iberri (talk) 17:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Capacitors have functions in both AC and DC circuits. Did you read the Capacitor article? hydnjo talk 18:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
It seems that the questioner feels that capacitors are only used to block DC voltage, allowing AC signals to pass. Capacitors are also used to hold a charge that may be discharged when needed. --Kainaw (talk) 00:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conservation of Energy

|<--F1--
|
|<--F2--
|
|

I have a question about the relationship between the linear and rotational analogs of classical mechanics. In space, if a force (F1) is imparted on the end of a rod, the rod would gain both translational kinetic energy and rotational kinetic energy, and the force would be accounted for as both a translational force and a torque. However, if an equal force (F2), is imparted on the center of mass, there would only be a change in linear KE since there would be no torque. However, these two results seem to contradict each other, and to violate the conservation of energy: despite the same force, the example of F1 gains additional (rotational) KE. Thus, the first time I saw the problem, I thought F1 should be divided into two components, one to calculate linear force, linear momentum, and linear KE; and the other to calculate torque, rotational momentum, and rotational KE. Yet I know this is not true from what I have learned(correction: see my comments below). How can one rationalize the extra energy due to the "double-accounting" of force in the example of F1? Does the force act over a greater distance? Or is there more energy lost to heat? --JianLi 17:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Energy is force integrated over the path. They don't move the same way in F1 and F2, so they don't have the same energy. Your mistake is in assuming equal force is equal energy. --BluePlatypus 19:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I think if there were no friction and no other forces, F1 by itself would impart no torque to the rod. The only way F1 could impart torque is if there were a hinge or something to apply a force in the opposite direction somewhere else along the rod. —Keenan Pepper 20:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Wouldn't inertia have something to do with it? Tzarius 20:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
BluePlatypus's explanation is correct. There's no "double accounting" here. Total KE is the integral of (v^2)dm over the rod in both cases. Separation of translational and rotational energies is just a matter of convenience so that we don't have to integrate every time. Equal force doesn't mean equal work. There's no "Law of conservation of force" either. The moment (torque) on the rod is independent of any friction. (A perfectly free bar hanging in vacuum will also acquire rotational KE when hit by a bullet at one end.) deeptrivia (talk) 20:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Assuming the object is in space, it would only rotate about it's center of mass if pushed on the end as in the case of F1. Thus, it would only have a torque in that case. StuRat 21:22, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

No, its center of mass will also have an acceleration equal to F1/m. So it will translate also. deeptrivia (talk) 21:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

No, it won't. Try it with a ruler on a table and you will see it just spins. StuRat 23:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Unless we are talking about different things, I'm pretty confident that the center of mass of any system with mass m will accelerate at F1/m if there is a net external force F1 on it, regardless of where the point of application of F1 is. There are no exceptions to this rule. deeptrivia (talk) 00:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
And I am quite sure you're dead wrong. The best evidence is just what the poster of the question asked about. If the same linear motion is imparted in both cases, but in the one case a rotational motion is also imparted, then you would have the translational plus the rotational kinetic energy in the one case and only the translational kinetic energy in the other case, and the two energy totals would be different. You can't put the same amount of energy into two systems and get a different amount back out. StuRat 00:09, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
StuRat, you are incorrect about this. You are also incorrect about conversion of mass into energy. Why so many wrong answers? -lethe talk 22:13, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
The point is, applying same force (at different points) does not imply putting in same amount of total energy, and therefore there's no paradox. This is the reason why it will be harder to keep a long heavy rod horizontal by holding it at one end compared to holding it in the middle (The translational KE in both cases will be the same; while the rotational KE will not be the same, since the moments created by these forces are not the same. To apply the same force F1 on the end of the rod for T seconds, the external agent will have to do more work compared to applying the same force at the center of mass. In Newtonian mechanics, you transfer to the center of mass a force whose line of action does not pass through the center of mass, and add a moment equalling rxF on the system. I teach rigid body dynamics to undergrad mechanical engineering students, and I know many students find this counterintuitive. deeptrivia (talk) 01:14, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I still say the force on the end wouldn't cause it to spin. The reason the ruler on the table spins is because friction drags the other end back in the opposite direction, creating a force couple. In a vacuum it would move in a straight line. —Keenan Pepper 00:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
If that was true, then no objects in space should be spinning. The reason they are spinning is that mostly dust and gas particles impacted them off-center during their formation. StuRat 07:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Wait, now I'm not so sure. This seems like it should be such an easy problem... —Keenan Pepper 01:07, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

This is a tricky question. First of all, a force on the end of a ruler in the absence of friction will certainly result in both rotation and linear motion. The linear motion should be the same regardless of where on the object it's applied, so there does appear to be a paradox. I'm going to consult with some of my fellow physics grad students and get back to you on this later. -- SCZenz 00:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, the linear motion isn't the same. Some of the energy/momentum goes into rotation. An analagous situation is that an object rolling down an incline ends up going slower than an object sliding down the same incline without friction. -- SCZenz 01:04, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Correct. If the force is applied at the center of the rod, then 100% of the energy will go into translational motion and 0% into rotational energy. And if the force is applied tangent to the rod at the end of the rod, 100% of the energy goes into rotation and 0% in translation. Of course, in the real world you can't apply a force at a point, but must apply it over a range, so, since the force can't all be applied exactly at the end of the rod, some small translational motion would result. StuRat 07:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Why do you say that? To have no translation would appear to me to violate conservation of momentum. I'm pretty sure there is still a substantial amount of translational motion. -- SCZenz 07:52, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
How does it violate conservation of momentum ? Translational momentum can be changed into rotational momentum with no violation. StuRat 08:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
"Translational momentum can be changed into rotational momentum with no violation." No. Linear momentum and angular momentum are separately conserved. deeptrivia (talk) 13:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Wrong. If that was the case the linear momentum of wind could never drive the rotational momentum of a windmill. It does however, and removes some of the linear momentum of the air in the process. In another example, the translational momentum of cyclinders in an internal combustion engine is converted into the rotational momentum of the drive shaft. StuRat 16:45, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
It's the angular momentum of molecules in the air about the center of the windmill fan that makes it work. A body need not rotate to have angular momentum, which is simply r x mv, where r is the vector joining the CM of the body and the point wrt which angular momentum is conserved. If wind turbine blades were so designed that this angular momentum cancels out, then it won't rotate no matter how high the wind speed (how large the linear momentum.) deeptrivia (talk) 18:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
An element of air travelling at a velocity v i located at a distance d from the ground will have an angular momentum d j x mv i = -dmvk wrt the ground.
An element of air travelling at a velocity v i located at a distance d from the ground will have an angular momentum d j x mv i = -dmvk wrt the ground.

deeptrivia (talk) 20:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

You're looking at it in a strange way, measuring the angular momentum of the air relative to the windmill. A more normal way to look at it is relative to the ground. In this view, the air has no rotational momentum, but only linear momentum, and loses some of this as it imparts rotational momentum on the windmill. StuRat 20:33, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course, it would have angular momentum wrt the ground too. The easiest way to calculate the angular acceleration of the wind turbine is to calculate angular momentum wrt the CM of the turbine. deeptrivia (talk) 20:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
In this case there is an external force (F1 or F2) acting on the system in question (the rod). Momentum–linear or angular–won't be conserved. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I was talking of a system that includes the agent that applies the force. If you exclude it, you can say that the rate of change of linear momentum will be equal to F1, and the rate of change of angular momentum about the center of mass will be (separately) equal to F1*L/2, assuming the CM is halfway the length. deeptrivia (talk) 15:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, this is the original poster. Thanks to everybody (especially Keenan Pepper, deeptrivia, and StuRat) for responding. I haven't read all your responses yet. However, I see some pretty heated arguments, and I just wanted to clarify what I know for sure (as these answers are from the 1998 Advanced Placement Physics C Test (mechanics section, second free-response)

  1. In the situation of F1, its center of mass would translate, as deeptrivia said.
  2. In the situation of F1, it would also rotate, despite the lack of friction.

The reason there is so much debate over this, I think, is that it's hard to imagine what it is like in space since we draw heavily upon our experience on earth, where friction and gravity are big factors. That's why the ruler example that StuRat cited is not an accurate simulation of F1. Instead, try dropping a pen above a desk, and, as it is falling, hitting its end with with your finger in a motion parallel to the plane of the table. That way, friction would not be a factor, and also, gravity would be acting perpendicular to the force you impart, so it wouldn't affect it. As you can see, it gains both translational motion and rotation. --JianLi 03:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

(m)<--v--(m)
 |
 |<--v--(m)
 |
(m)

FYI, I looked at the original AP question, and it does not mention force at all, as it is a conservation of momentum problem involving collisions and velocity, so what I said in my original post, about what was "true," is not necessarily right (the amended diagram is above). That said, the previous two points that I numbered and bolded still apply. In this case, both collisions gain equal linear momentum/KE, and the upper case also gains an angular momentum/KE The AP problem is: there is a massless rod of length "l" with spheres of clay on the ends (each with mass "m") kinda like a barbell. Another sphere of clay with mass "m" and velocity "v" hits the construction perpendicularly and sticks. In the first example, it hits it in its center of mass, and the second example it hits at its end (striking one of the other spheres). Remember, in both examples the moving mass sticks to the barbell. Obviously, the two systems have the same initial KE. However the rod in the second example gains rotational KE as well as the translational KE that the first rod also gains. Why? This is because in both cases, KE was lost to heat, etc. due to it being an inelastic collision (since the clay stuck), and more KE was lost in the first collision than in the second, which explains why the first collision had enough energy to have rotational KE too. Like I said, I'm not sure how this relates to Force, as this problem only mentions velocity, and I think it could be any quantity of force, depending on how much time the collision took (m \Delta \mathbf{v}= \mathbf{F} \Delta t) --JianLi 04:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Ignore my previous responses, they're dead wrong. =P The fundamental thing is that the angular momentum of an isolated system about any point is conserved independently. The origin of the coordinate system does not have to be at the center of mass. So, a mass moving in a straight line has angular momentum about any point not on the line, and a single force has torque with respect to a point not on its line of action.
So I think the solution to the energy conservation problem is that the system in which the ball of clay is heading toward the end of the rod has more rotational kinetic energy to begin with, because the ball of clay has angular momentum with respect to the center of mass of the system. Does that make sense? —Keenan Pepper 18:04, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Your idea about the ball initially having rotational KE is interesting, but, if you're trying to explain where the "extra" rotational KE at the end came from, it's not even necessary. As I wrote above, both systems actually lost energy due to heat, etc. in the inelastic collision; it's just that the first system lost less energy, so it had enough to have rotational KE - JianLi
Total initial E = 1/2 mv^2
Total final E
  • for midpoint collision = 1/6 mv^2
  • for endpoint collision = 5/12 mv^2
As you can see, there is no need to explain "additional" rotational KE, as E was actually lost to to an inelastic collision in both cases -JianLi

Ok, with the new clay ball model there would be some changes. In addition to delivering a certain amount of energy, as the force would, the clay balls will also increase the mass. In the case where the clay ball hits at the other clay ball on the end, the rod will rotate about the NEW center of gravity, taking the new ball's mass into account. Since it doesn't hit exactly at the end, but rather at 1/2 the end ball's diameter from the end, some linear motion will also be imparted. StuRat 19:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

By mentioning the part about "1/2 end ball's diameter," are you implying that there would be no translational motion at all if it were hit "exactly at the end?" If so, I'm pretty sure that's wrong. As deeptrivia said, "the center of mass of any system with mass m will accelerate at F1/m if there is a net external force F1 on it, regardless of where the point of application of F1 is. There are no exceptions to this rule." And the AP answers support this, stating that the final translational momentum and KE will be the same in both of the two cases, so I don't think the amount of translational motion depends on how far from the end it hits the rod (assuming that it does hit the rod, of course). Also, physics problems at this level are usually very simplified; in this problem, the balls are assumed to be point masses anyway since we are not given their diameters.-JianLi

[edit] black hole

what is a black hole and is time travel possible with the help of a black hole? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.1.217.105 (talk • contribs).

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! Did you know you can use the search bar at the left side of your screen to find answers to most of your questions? Try searching for "black hole" and "time travel". --David Iberri (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Try time travel and black hole Gerard Foley 17:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

It's not possible using a black hole--they only have stuff go in, not out--unless you count travelling into the future faster than you would otherwise. It may be possiblse using a wormhole; see the physics section of the time travel article. -- SCZenz 00:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
From the wormhole article: "In physics, a wormhole is a hypothetical topological feature of spacetime that is essentially a 'shortcut' through space and time." and "Wormholes known as Schwarzschild wormholes or Einstein-Rosen bridges are theoretical bridges between areas of space that are thought to be found in the center of a black hole and white hole, joining two universes." DirkvdM 09:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
See What is a black hole, really?, Time Travel - Fact or Fiction? and other topics from the Usenet Physics FAQ. – b_jonas 23:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maxcy-Silberston curve

What is Maxcy-Silberston curve that is used in Automobile production industry? I just know that it is related to mass production system, but want to know more about it. I would appreciate any help on this topic. Thanks.

[edit] eye compared to a camera

Can the resolution of the human eye be (roughly) described in megapixels the way digital camera resolution is expressed?

Digital cameras (and conventional ones too) mimic the retina using color sensitive receptors for red, green (x2), or blue on a CCD, which is much bigger than the retina. Each receptor functions as both a rod (since each one captures luminosity, regardless of color) and cones (specific to its named color only) at the same time. The receptors send this information to a CPU, which either compresses the info (like JPG) and saves it or just saves it (like RAW). A 3.1 mega pixel camera has 3.1 million red, green (x2), or blue receptors.

My biology text book says, “Input from about 125 million rods and cones synapses on bipolar cells, which send the signals to just one million ganglion cells.” Does that mean that the retina (our body's CCD) has a resolution of 125 mega pixels which is then compressed to a 1 mega pixel image sent through the ganglion cells?

For a digital camera to capture an image as crisp as the human eye can capture, would it need to be 125 mega pixels per retina sized area of its CCD?

Of course, we would need a matching printer, right? What if we were using our fictitious camera as a bionic eye and plugging it directly into the optic nerve? Would we only need one mega pixel per retina sized area on our CCD or would we need the 125 mega pixel with a CPU to compress the info down to 1 mega pixel? --TheLimbicOne(talk) 18:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

This thought is somewhat developed in this website. Take a look. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 22:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Note that they have implanted electrodes into the visual cortex of the human brain, which do allow limited vision for the blind. At present it's quite low resolution, like 100 pixels, though. StuRat 23:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Information technology

it's information, it's technology, why it's information technology! --Noodhoog 20:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Why not? It's technology of information: putting things like Information theory to practical use. Compare it with Informatics, which is also known as Information science. deeptrivia (talk) 04:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] car radio narrowband filter

I would like to get a filter installed in my car radio to drastically improve its adjacent channel selectivity (FM). I am willing to give up some audio quality, but I am downright sick of hearing static-filled copies of adjacent channels when tuning to a weak station. I don't know how to mess with the radio myself, so where can I go? I live in Arkansas. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.184.88.44 (talk • contribs) 14:11, January 22, 2006.

Have you tried taking your car (and your radio) to a mechanic? He/she might be able to give you better help, depending on your model of radio... — QuantumEleven | (talk) 09:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think a mechanic would be of much help here, unless you'd already found a filter and just needed someone to install it. Anyway, I don't think there's generally a whole lot you can do to increase selectivity on a car stereo; it's either got decent selectivity built-in or (more likely these days) it doesn't. You're probably going to be better off just buying a whole new radio. I'd suggest visiting the Crutchfield site (crutchfield.com) or calling them at 800-955-6000. Supposedly they're very good on the phone and willing to spend the time to help you figure out what you need. If they can't find a narrowband filter for you, they should at least be able to tell you which car stereos have the best selectivity in your price range. (Disclaimer: I've never dealt with Crutchfield myself.) Alternately, you may want to post a question on the CarStereo.com forums. --Aaron 15:58, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brain transplants!

What stops people from transplanting one brain into another body? If you could connect everything to the spinal cord and other attachments, why wouldn't it work? And what would happen if you could theoretically put a man's brain into a woman's body?

I think the question is what stops people from trying, because noones tried on an unclassified basis. Read article, for instance (and here's a funny gag). Karol 20:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
All the nerves and blood vessels would need to be reattached without any air bubbles in the blood vessels. Provided you could find a donor with the exact same skull geometry it seems possible (after vast advances in medical technology). However, the donor would have had to die from a brain ailment, or else the donor body would still be damaged after the transplant. And, since the brain is the essential part that is "you", it would be more proper to call it a body transplant. I imagine the brain would need to adjust to differences in the new body, such as differences in height which would require adjusting how you walk, for example. Immunosuppressants would be needed to prevent rejection, as in all transplants. A gender change seems like it would work, as parts of a body of one gender more or less match one-to-one with the other gender (for example, the nerves in the penis would match the nerves in the clitoris). StuRat 21:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

We really need an easy indexing system or a new set of ref desk editors, as this is another one we did to death about 2 months ago. alteripse 21:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Read I Will Fear No Evil for a fictional take on brain transplants. —Keenan Pepper 22:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

See also brain transplant and notice how you end up under a different title (as StuRat pointed out). About the gender mixing, since much (how much?) of one's gender is determined by hormones and (most?) hormones are produced in the brain, the body would probably adapt over time (growing breasts or a penis and that sort of thing). DirkvdM 10:46, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. The sex hormones estrogen and testosterone are primarily produced by the ovaries and testicles, respectively. This is why castrated males (eunuchs) don't appear or sound very masculine. StuRat 12:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
As to the ethical issue raised in the BBC article, the only objection is that it's, well, grotesque and, ehm, unethical. So it's unethical because it's unethical. No real reason is given. I't just a matter of getting used to. People don't argue anymore that flying is bad because God didn't give us wings. We've gotten used to that it don't give it a second thought anymore. Anyway, if it's ok to transplant every single organ individually, then what's wrong with transplanting them all in one go? It's the logical next step. Of course, it wuld be nice if it were possible to connect all the nerves, so we'll have to wait for that development in medical science, but muy bet is that that is just a few decades away. I'll see this happen in my lifetime. And I hope for Hawking that he will too. :) DirkvdM 11:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Nobody ever thought that if someone was given a Brain Transplant that they wouldn't really be the same person anymore. They would have the Knowledge and memories of the person they got the brain from. This is only the case in bodies that get new brains, not if someone wants a new body. But then whose to stop scientist from creating Robots with human brains?

And this is where it gets really interresting. Suppose we could make an interface between a brain and a computer so that the two could communicate so well they ultimately become one entity. Then the person would have access to all sorts of sensors and actuators that go way beyond the capabilities of the carbon based entity it was first restricted to. And of course the size of the computer would be in principle limitless. So the old brain would become an insignificant part of the bigger entity. And when that old brain dies, that would be like a minor brain damage. Result: ETERNAL LIFE! (Sorry about the shouting, but this is a big one, right? :) ) DirkvdM 18:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I think that might work out more like adding external hard disks on a computer. That is, when the CPU goes, the computer is still dead. Getting a computer to actually think might be much harder than just storing info. I would think the first use of a computer interface might be to access info, maybe even Wikipedia, just by thinking a question. StuRat 13:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Claims of Scientific Evidence Against Evolution

In your website, you said talked about scientific evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution.But then, how come I've heard some Christians and creationists say that there is evidence against it?I'm confused!How can there be both evidence for evolution(or any other theory) and against it? What are these so-called evidences against evolution that many Christians claim to exist and are they really evidences against it?Please make an article in Wikipedia about these claims of evidence against evolution!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.245.178.131 (talk • contribs).

There is a huge amount in wikipedia on these topics. Start with the Creation-evolution_controversy article and it will lead you to others. David D. (Talk) 21:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Note: the same user asked exactly the same question here just over a week ago (see [85]). —David Wahler (talk) 21:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate you pointing that out. I'll be more alert in the future. David D. (Talk) 21:33, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Here is the archived version of the previous time it was asked. A lot of good answers. David D. (Talk) 21:41, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Note that just about any theory has evidence for and against it, you must go with the majority of evidence to determine if the theory is reasonable or not. For example, the presence of pyramids in both Egypt and South America could be taken as "evidence" that the ancient Egyptians colonized the Americas. However, there is far more evidence that they didn't (different style pyramids, different time frames, low technology level of Egyptian sailing vessels, different genetic profiles of the individuals, different skeletal features, lack of historical accounts, etc.). StuRat 23:18, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Occam's Razor supports this. freshgavin TALK 01:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Scientific theory isn't a democracy. You don't go with the 'majority' of the evidence, you go with all the evidence. Also, it is impossible to gather evidence for something that isn't true unless the evidence isn't any good, or you're misusing it. This is, presumably, what the creationists are doing, and what you would be doing if you linked the pyramids in one place to the pyramids in another without actually bothering to study their design or age. Black Carrot 03:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
You will almost never find that all the evidence points in one direction only. One reason is that the evidence can be wrong (studies can either be intentionally faked or have an unintentional error in them). Another possibility is that the theory is good, but needs a little tweak to perfect it. For example, the heliocentric model of the solar system originally had all the planets in circular orbits. When this didn't quite match the observed orbits this could be taken as "evidence the heliocentric model of the solar system is wrong". However, the theory was correct, it just needed to be altered to have the planets in elliptical, rather than circular, orbits about the Sun. In medical studies, it is quite common to have some studies show a medication is effective while others show it is not. The "majority rule" method must be applied there. StuRat 08:57, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

No scientific theory is perfect; every nontrivial scientific theory has unexplained aspects and unanswered questions. Science is always trying to refine its theories and answer new questions that come up. If there are currently a few unanswered questions or unrebutted critiques of evolution, this does not mean that evolution is "troubled" or "in doubt" as a theory. Quite the contrary: it means it's a healthy, vibrant theory. (It would be extremely unusual if a theory as complex as evolution did not have a few unanswered questions or unrebutted critiques at any given point in time.)

What's important to realize is that most of the allegedly "controversial" aspects of evolution which are bandied about like so many brickbats by evolution's latter-day critics are not, in fact, brand-new hitherto-unasked impossibly hard questions which scientists can't answer. They are or might once have been good questions, but they're questions which were asked and answered decades or centuries ago. Our current understanding of evolutionary theory does not quail before these questions: it embraces them; it's happy to answer them; it owes its current form to the fact that it has successfully addressed and answered them.

In particular, the notion that life is "too complex" to have arisen by chance, and "must obviously" be the work of an intelligent designer, is a very, very old one. It was most famously expressed by William Paley over two hundred years ago, in 1802, but it goes back at least to Cicero in ancient Rome. If you accost a modern evolutionary biologist and suggest that life is "too complex" to have arisen by chance, he is not going to slap his forehead and say "You're right! I never thought of that! Our whole theory must be wrong!". Instead, he will explain (if you're patient and open-minded enough to listen) how the available genetic diversity and mutation rates and natural selection mechanisms are more than adequate to explain the current complexity of life as we know it, given the millions of years it's had to evolve. It's true that this is a surprising result, and that it contradicts intuition. Many scientific results are like that. But the evidence behind the theory and the math that ties it together are unshakable. Steve Summit (talk) 03:57, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Paley's viewpoints were, of course, most famously attacked by Richard Dawkins in his book The Blind Watchmaker. However I think you will find that the math is far from 'unshakeable'. There are plenty of questions still to be answered there. We know very little about how complex structures evolve (if they do). You will find, if you look, lots of quotes from evolution apologists saying things like "if all scientists don't get together and insist that all the problems of evolution are solved, then the people will stop believing in it and that will be very bad for science". DJ Clayworth 16:10, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Wanna give an example?--Fangz 00:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
When my good old Occam designed the Pyramids, he told me about his deep horror for proofs.
"It is something like advertising, quoth he, that makes you believe that you've perused every reason and took your decision out of free will. Or a confession obtained under torture. Nauseous human mind!
Science and law work under the proofocracy. That's their method, and there is good reason for that. Science recognises no evidence, as every proof is only local or temporary and must be falsifiable. Law needs to produce results, sometimes too quickly for true justice." I agreed. --DLL 19:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Love-causing Hormones

I've heard that love and sexual attraction are caused by chemicals in our brains called hormones or pheromones.But the question is, how do those hormones get to determine exactly WHO you fall in love with?For example, let's just say that a single man often meets and comes in contact with 3 single women.If then, what in the hormones determine which one of these 3 women hormone makes him falls in love with?Is this simply a matter of pure,random chance or is there an unknown force or influence that determines it?I don't like the idea or possibility that that might be something or someone "out there" determining who you and me marry and fall in love with! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.245.178.131 (talk • contribs).

I think the hormones and chemicals come after you see someone you like and fall in love,not before.and you like them because of their looks, personlity or both.--Cosmic girl 22:22, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
That's right. Some of the visual factors are: symmetricality of the face, the waist to chest ratio, sharp vs soft facial features, etc. Women are attracted to different men depending on where they are in their monthly cycle, sometimes going for a more masculine look, sometimes for a more feminine look. StuRat 23:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I second the above, with the obvious correction that strictly speaking hormones don't start working after you fall in love - they're working before and during too and they're part of the reason.
I'd also add that it's certainly not a matter of chance, but nor is it truly a matter of free choice. Obviously we can't fall in love with people we can't somehow get in contact with, but we can't help where we're born - that's chance. People also only very rarely fall in love with the profoundly disfigured because they just can't fine them attractive - but this isn't chance or freedom; this is hardwired into our brains. Point is, there are numerous variables that determine who we fall in love with and how successful we are in our relationships. And yes, some of them are "out there" and beyond our control. --George 00:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Go pick up an introductory social psychology text; it should have some enlightening (if not particularly fulfilling) insights on the topic. Ultimately, to some extent this argument gets back to free will. --Robert Merkel 06:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
My first thought was also that the hormones kick in after you meet someone. But my second thought (and probably what the questioneer asks about) is "what if you administer such hormones to someone when they are in contact with you?" In other owrds, which of the two (the meeting or the hormones) triggers the 'falling in love' feeling? In still other words, which way around is the causality with the love and the hormones? DirkvdM 09:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I think we are confusing hormones and neurochemicals, hormones are there all the time and they are part of the reason why you fall in love, but neurochemicals start acting on your brain after you 'fall in love' or after you 1st see the person you like...I believe one of those neurochemicals or neurotransmisors is vasopressin and other is PEA and ... well they act on certain phases of 'love'. there is attraction first, then commitment and stuff...but a psychology book on love will answer almost all your questons like Robert Merkel said.--Cosmic girl 15:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Though I can't find any reference to it in our article on French kissing, ISTR that one of the main physiological advantages of the French kiss is that it allows for an easy exchange of pheremones between partners. Grutness...wha? 23:11, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


Are pheromones for real? wow didn't know that. --Cosmic girl 19:55, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Big Bang Theory vs. The Law of the Conservation of Matter

I've heard that matter can neither be created nor destroyed.This is called the law of the conservation of matter.But now, scientists say that all matter in the Universe was created during the Big Bang.But how can matter be come out into existence in a "Big Bang" if matter can't created at all?Do you agree that the Big Bang theory violates the law of the conservation of matter? User:Bowei

You could start checking CP-violation ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 22:45, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Another point, less accurate but a good model, is that if there was no moment in time before the Big Bang, then all matter/energy has existed in all moments of time. Conservation is still true.
And of course, matter is energy: matter can be destroyed, which 'produces' energy, and vice versa. -- Ec5618 22:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
You'd be better saying matter can be CONVERTED into energy and vice versa. The term "destroyed" is misleading. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 00:32, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Matter can be converted to energy (happens in stars every second of ever day) and vice versa. The Big Bang was an expansion, not an explosion. The real Big Bang Theory is quite complicated and would require some background in mathematics and physics to understand (which I really don't have), and any further explainations you will be given will likely be very simplified ones. Keep all of this in mind.Captain Jackson 00:52, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
You're talking about the laws of physics (as we know them), but those break down if you go further back than something like a millisecond after the big bang. From the big bang article: "There is no compelling physical model for the first 10-33 seconds of the Universe." Yes, I know this sounds lame, but there you go. Also, I doubt if one can say that all matter was created at the Big Bang. It, ehm, sort of 'emerged'? Anyway, I've got my own alternative to the Big Bang theory, but that's hardly been scientifically scrutinised. DirkvdM 10:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
To expand on that, remember that the laws of chemistry didn't emerge until there were atoms, and the laws which govern biological life didn't emerge until there were cells. So it makes sense that the laws of physics, which include gravitation, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces, wouldn't exist until there was matter and energy in the universe to begin with. Where did it all come from? It may have just always existed in a singularity somewhere, in other forms.

Also, I believe that the real law of conservation of matter states that matter can neither be created nor destroyed in a chemical reaction. The last four words are important. Captain Jackson 15:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

If you add up all of the energy in the universe, converting all mass into energy, and then allow for the negative energy of gravitation, the result is zero!

"In the inflationary theory, matter, antimatter, and photons were produced by the energy of the false vacuum, which was released following the phase transition. All of these particles consist of positive energy. This energy, however, is exactly balanced by the negative gravitational energy of everything pulling on everything else. In other words, the total energy of the universe is zero!" [86]

⇒ normxxx| talk ⇒ email 06:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Einstein vs. Quantum Theory

I've heard that Einstein didn't like quantum theory.Why?

A famous quote of his is "I can't believe that God plays dice with the universe". In other words, he didn't like the random, unknowable part of QM. He preferred a universe which is predictable. Also, QM and Einstein's theories are somewhat incompatible, and it requires some effort to accomodate both. StuRat 22:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Refs: Incompleteness of quantum physics [87] --Zeizmic 01:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weird

Is there any reason why a page would just close on me? I was trying to look at the article about the scanning tunneling microscope and it just closed before I could even read the first line... and since that happened like 4 times with the link in the question about atoms here at the science reference desk I just looked it up on google and clicked on the 1st link, and guess what?! it just cloesd on me again! what the hell? is this something paranormal? hahaha lol...I'm scared.--Cosmic girl 22:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Probably just your web browser crashing. Which operating system and web browser software are you using? --Canley 23:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean I'm really dumb for computers, but I use windows xp and mozilla firefox and ... any page that has an article on that just closes whenever I try to read the article it has! no matter if it's wikipedia, or a physics page or the nobel prize page, every page closes on me when I try to read it...and this doesn't happen with other pages and has never happened to me before, ever.guess what? I can't even play the game about the scanning tunneling microscope at nobelprize.org! and I've played it before. basicly any page that involves that microscope just closes up on me and I'm not even that interested in it!--Cosmic girl 23:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok it just stopped happening...so weird...--Cosmic girl 00:07, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I think there is a bug in the current version of FireFox under Windows XP. If I have multiple browser windows open, sometimes FireFox changes from one window to another when I navigate to a new page. Are your FireFox windows closing or just going into the background behing another window? --JWSchmidt 03:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

That happened yesterday, it ONLY closed when I tried to read about the scanning tunneling microscope! only then! I swear...and it closed, it didn't go to the background... and no matter where I tried to read it, that kept happening...not even a game about it would stay open...it closed immediately. so strange this has never happened to me before. and it doesn't close all the time at the same time! sometimes it closes before the page even loads and other times it closes a couple of seconds after the page has loaded...it seems like it does so at will or something.--Cosmic girl 15:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 23

[edit] Why Copy Wikipedia?

Other than the public domain status, why are there so many websites out there copying articles from Wikipedia and putting them on their sites? What do they have to gain from it, just mirroring this site? Why are they spending money and wasting bandwidth doing it? Captain Jackson 00:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

As Wikipedia is non-profit, you can assume that the motivation for many is money, as most mirrors other than Wikipedia itself institute advertizing on their pages. freshgavin TALK 00:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, just money. Also, Wikipedia is not public domain, but GFDL. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 01:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Hey, come to my FREE encyclopedia! (and be exposed to my adverts) and get better grades in school!
  • Don't go anywhere else!!!
  • This is the place !!!!! (fine print hydnjo talk 02:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC))

Money aside, many people have the will to create a website but don't have the creativity to, like, actually create any real content. So they go find some free, "public domain" content (or what they imagine to be public domain content) and copy it to their fledgling site. Usually, in an attempt to make their site seem attractive (and assuage whatever lingering internal pangs of guilt they might have) they will claim that their site somehow presents the copied information better, or otherwise adds value for their site's readers. (I don't know how many actual readers end up falling for this ruse in practice.) Steve Summit (talk) 03:20, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Right, just like people put in google buttons on their pages for searches, and many news websites constantly quote nothing but AP and Reuters. Countless numbers of un-skilled internetians with ambitious dreams of attracting unknowing visitors. freshgavin TALK 06:21, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
This is a public site that is edited or added by any willing internet user. The beauty and popularity of Wikipedia articles is in its ever-changing and well-reviewed information. Although it is open content, copying the articles doesn't detract profits from the website, so I would promote the dessimination of information through wikipedia even if it includes copying and pasting simple articles on the websites of others.--192.160.130.12 21:36, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adobe Acrobat

Greetings:

Hello, I have a question concerning Adobe Acrobat. I was wondering how you can copy the slides onto a different document program. Or printmultiple pages of adobe into a single page. Answers, solutions and comments will be deeply appreciated. Thanks Shanna Zhang 129.97.237.131 03:17, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're asking. Do you want to convert the text in an Acrobat PDF into another program (like Microsoft Word)? (Just cut-and-paste or export to RTF) Or 'place' the actual pages into a different document? (The only programs I know that can do that are Adobe InDesign and Adobe Illustrator). If you just want to print several pages on a piece of paper, go to the Page Setup and do it there. --Canley 06:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
As I understand it, you can only edit pdf files with Adobe's Acrobat. The reader is for free, but when you want to use the texts in any other way you'll have to pay through your nose for the editor. That's the ruse. I don't touch pdf's with a 3.05 m pole. Although it also seems that pdf's are good for printing (more wysiwyg, I believe). So it would make sense to convert a file to pdf before printing (and only then and not do any further editing with that version). But for that you'd need that editor and if you don't want to pay for it you'd have to get your hands on an illegal copy. But then you'd still indirectly be supprting a format that is generally to our disadvantage. DirkvdM 10:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

pdf's, in general, cannot be easily edited. Some are just bit scans, and some have printing commands sandwiched between every letter. If I am making a slide with pdfs, then I just use a screen-capture program, good enough for slides. Otherwise, you can print it and scan it. OpenOffice outputs pdfs but you can't bring them in again. It truly is a terrible format for re-editing. --Zeizmic 15:32, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] msssearchnet

My computer recently got infected with this annoying process on my windows XP operating system. I have tried forever to get it off but it can not. Are there any removal tools that will remove and kill the process. I have used spyware removal applications but they do not detect the process. I need help quick.

That's a nasty one! There's a forum where they discuss it here. Looks like you have to: kill four processes, delete eight registry values, unregister two DLLs, remove seven files and delete four directories. The steps are listed on the forum post. There is an automated tool to do it all but I haven't used it as I don't have this malware on my computer. Good luck! --Canley 06:52, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

You could use a program called HijackThis to delete this virus. You still need to direct the program by telling it what to remove, but it is safer than editing the registry yourself. Go here to see what files need to be removed. I have used HijackThis before, but not on this virus. Cybergoth 22:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] science project

hello! my daughter is doing a science project. to help her out, i have one quick question. What is the effect of temperature on a musical note? please respond to my question as soon as possible. thank you very much for your time.

The question is confusing. A musical note is, essentially, vibrating air. Are you thinking of the effect of temperature on musical instruments? If so, have a look at [88] and [89]. For the range of temperatures at which an instrument would be played, temperature won't ordinarily make a lot of difference with regard to pitch. - Nunh-huh 06:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
On the contrary, for wind instruments the effect is quite noticeable. The reason is because the speed of sound increases with increasing temperature, so on a hot day the frequency of the sound produced by a tube of air is higher than that produced by the same tube on a cold day. In other words, the same instrument will sound flat in cold air and sharp in warm air. —Keenan Pepper 07:19, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Which is why you see salvation army trumpeteers in winter warm the mouthpiece of their instrument under their armpit (after they've let the spit drip out - they're a gory bunch, really). At least in US films - I've never seen such a band in Amsterdam. DirkvdM 10:23, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
In Canada, when it gets to 40 below, they warm the mouthpieces so their lips don't stick to it. Everybody knows that! :)--Zeizmic 15:26, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
When air is frozen, does sound propagate at all ? Does brrrrrish(!) air slow musical vibrations ? Also, what happens under bar pressures very different from average ones (pression & temperature are quite linked, but only in a closed volume). Is this the sense of the question ? --DLL 19:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Another (related) point - though it's only relevant for music or sound heard at a great distance - is that I'm fairly sure sounds carry further in cold weather. I suspect that this is to do with the thermodynamics of the air it passes through. Grutness...wha? 23:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure about on a colder day specifically, but sound DOES travel further when there is a temperature inversion, see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4521232.stm Modest Genius 00:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
DLL- What do you mean, 'frozen air'? If you mean when the gasses in air are so cold they're solid, of course it does. Whack something solid with your ear against it, and see if you hear a thump. If you mean, when it's below 0C, why would you think it wouldn't? If people couldn't hear in cold climates, don't you think the news would have reached us by now? Black Carrot 00:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Frozen milk

Due to absense of a fridge, I have to store milk between two frames of a window. When it's too cold the milk can freeze as a result. As you probably know, milk has quite complex structure of proteins, fat and water. What happens when the milk is frozen and then unfrozen back? Does it lose any properties, or it is reversible operation? Grue 07:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

The separation of the cream is the only effect I'm aware of. However, you really need to get a working fridge so your food doesn't rot when it gets warmer out. If you can't manage a full sized fridge right now, how about one of those "minibar" fridges ? StuRat 08:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Also note that the UV light from the Sun might break down the milk. StuRat 08:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Which is why cows keep their milk in handy light-proof bellypacks, shielding it from the Sun. So an alternative would be to keep a cow and drink straight from the source. Any excess milk, you could sell. And with that money you might buy yourself a fridge, so you you wouldn't need the cow anymore. DirkvdM 10:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
And if you had two cows, you'd have a famous joke. But, seriously, you could try small packets of that disgusting UHT milk that most of Europe apparently drinks (you don't need to keep it cold so it wouldn't need to sit in the window), or the even more disgusting powdered milk. Me, I'd scrimp and save as quickly as I could to buy some kind of fridge. --Robert Merkel 11:21, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Condensed milk cans might be a good alternative. StuRat 12:20, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't know anyone who drinks such milk. And I live in Europe. Actually, I had never heard of UHT before. The French don't seem to think much of it either, because else that carton wouldn't have the English abbreviation UHT on it (to the French that must look offensive). The article doesn't say where this stuff is used. Since you say Europe and that abbreviation is English, I suppose England? DirkvdM 19:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
The French probably expand it as Ultra-Haute Température. Not every French acronym is spelled backwards, you know. As for its popularity in various parts of Europe, I can't really say much. For what it's worth, here in Finland it is available in most stores, so there must be at least some demand for it. I've found it useful for keeping around in case I run out of normal milk, since unopened it lasts practically forever. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:21, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, not backwards, but probably TUH. DUH! :) DirkvdM 13:10, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I, and many others I know, regularly freeze skimmed milk in the freezer to preserve it and cut down on trips to the grocery store. I've noticed no ill effects. DJ Clayworth 15:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
The butter article describes what ice crystals from chilling milk does to the fat globules. Since skim milk has less fat (typically 0.1%), it probably survives freezing better. Cybergoth 22:29, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Soy milk also lasts longer than cow milk with minimal refrigeration. I'm not sure what effects freezing has on it though. StuRat 17:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

It makes it cold and hard! freshgavin TALK 04:01, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speed of light/Time travel

After reading the previous intriguing topics, an old question popped up in my mind. If we could [hypothetically] go into space at twice the speed of light, would we be able to see the light of historical situations, like we see stars as they were a long time ago? Let's say we were going facing the earth, wouldnt it look like rewinding a moving image? Is this possible? 83.5.204.185 07:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly what it would look like. Not only would it look like that, but according to the Theory of Relativity, you really would effectively be travelling through time. That theory also places rather formidible obstacles to going faster than (or at) the speed of light; in fact, it's believed to be impossible. -- SCZenz 07:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Impossible for people, yes, for fundamental particles like tachyons, no. StuRat 08:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
... You mean hypothetical particles. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 08:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I meant, good catch. StuRat 09:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, if tachyons exist, they could never slow down to below the speed of light, so they wouldn't be of much use to us. — QuantumEleven | (talk) 09:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Also one of those 'brilliant ideas' from my childhood. But then I realised you'd need a fairly strong telescope, to put it mildly. However, if this makes you travel back in time, you could just double back and return at some time in the past. In which case you'd better make room for a rather sizeable turning circle. :) But then how to get back to your own time? (What's the point i knowing this if yo can't share it with your mates?) I suppose that once you've figured out how to travel faster than the speed of light, you'll also know how to go slower than standing still. DirkvdM 10:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
As far as I understand it, there would be no formal travelling back in time. It's just a four-dimentional space, so-called "space-time". There is a notion of event, it's just a point in 4D space (c*t,x,y,z). Still there are no tricks. A speed is, as usual, defined as little change in 3D distance, devided by a corresponding change in time. If you say the body is moving, it automatically means that the time increases (just by definition).
One of the postulates of special relativity sais that no interactions can spread faster than c. Thus, two events, near in time, but with much enough distance between them are not cause-effect related. In Newtons mechanics, which we ordinarily use (even in our language), "A occurred earlier than B", is equal to "A was a cause, B is effect". In special relativity, these notions are not equal. So, yes, if you manage to travel faster than light, you will break cause-effect relation and will be able to see light from past of the Earth; poetically, you can call it travelling back in time, but formally, it isn't.
The "real" tricks arise when you go to a moving reference frame. It's because "space-time" is pseudo-euclid, that is, if the vector between two events is (c*t,x,y,z,), the value that remains constant is not (c^2*t^2 + x^2 + y^2 + z^2) as one would expect, but (c^2*t^2 - x^2 - y^2 - z^2). ellol 12:31, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Going back to your own time the easy part. Just travel for a while close to (less than) the speed of light (the closer the better) and thanks to the relativistic effects you can travel into the future without experiencing most of the time in between! freshgavin TALK 04:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, but that's just travelling into the future the way we all do, simply through the passing of time. It's just that time passes at different speeds in different referenceframes, creating the illusion of time-travel. But the notion of travelling back in time by exceeding the speed of light (if that were possible) is (would be) more than poetic. It would be quite real. I think. But then, as with everything, I am no expert in the field. DirkvdM 13:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure none of us are experts in this field : ). Anyways I don't see the difference between the illusion of travelling in time, and actually travelling. The relativistic effects of travelling close to the speed of light are hardly an illusion, and if you could do that you would, quite actually, move forward in time faster than you would if you couldn't. If emerging 50 years later not having aged and having felt the passage of no time doesn't constitute time travel into the future, than I don't know what does (all poetics aside). freshgavin TALK 07:05, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
DirkvdM, thank you, it gets interesting :) So, let's consider you flying with the speed 2c. What then? We have to distinguish two notions: time in our, "not moving" system (call it t), and time in your system (call it T). So, let's write down one of the basic laws: that is, invariance of interval in all reference frames. Square of interval is s^2=(c^2*t^2 - x^2 - y^2 - z^2), if t, x, y and z are time and spatial distances between two events. Let you be moving along x axis; t and T are time distances between two moments; and x is distance you travelled in our system between those moments:
s^2 = c^2 * T^2 (you are not moving in your system)
s^2 = c^2 * t^2 - x^2 = c^2 * t^2 - (2c * t)^2 = -3 * c^2 * t^2 (in our system your velocity is 2c, => you travelled distance t*2c)
In result we have T^2 = -3 *t^2, => T=i*sqrt(3)*t or T=-i*sqrt(3)*t
Hmmmm... Really, it makes no sense, except confirming once more, that since we used wrong suggestion about you travelling with velocity more than c, we got senseless answer.
Btw, difference between time and casuality is well explained at Special_relativity#Causality. ellol 17:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Two questions!

Two questions, rolled into one nifty little asking box thingamajigger.

  1. What does glycine have to do with photography? It was listed in the photography chemicals category before I removed it, and as it says "it is not optically somethingorother" (paraphrasing), I fail to see how it could possibly be related in any way. (It's not a homework question; I just want to know if I screwed up.)
  2. Why is it that whenever a male ejaculates they have the urge to urinate soon after?

As you can see, these are very different subjects. Cernen Xanthine Katrena 11:05, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

As for the second question, see urinary tract infection for a possible clue to what may be some sort of instinctual cleansing. Also, see the sex question which is right now near the bottom of the Ref. Desk/Misc. page. As for the first question, I believe, not sure though, that glycine was used to process that old fashioned film that cameras used to have before you kids and your computers came up with them there digital jobbers. Dismas|(talk) 11:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
P.S. I did a little googling and came up with this which may give you some idea of what glycine is used for in relation to photography. Dismas|(talk) 11:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
As for the 2nd question, I agree with the first response, but would add that urine is designed to be antiseptic, mainly due to it's acidic pH, while semen is designed to be "food" for sperm, which also makes it food for bacteria. Thus, clearing it out of the urinary tract fairly quickly is important to preventing infections. StuRat 12:11, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Can I pick a couple of nits, sir? By most of our evidence, urine isn't designed to be anything. Second, it is aseptic rather than antiseptic. Third, it is aseptic not because of its mild acidity (there are many bugs that grow at mildly acid pH), but because it comes from a place with no bugs. Fourth, the mild STD and UTI protection afforded by postcoital urination is simply a washout effect: the flowing urine washes many new bacteria from the urethral orifice. alteripse 12:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
That explanation doesn't really work, as the semen also come from an aseptic place, so would have also "washed out" anything in the urinal tract. I stand by urine being antiseptic, and it has even been used as such in some cultures. Here, for example, are instructions on using cow urine for disease control:
http://oisat.org/control_methods/other_methods/animal_urine.html
As for my use of the word designed, you are indeed being picky. I use it as a shortcut for..."those animals with more antiseptic urine tended to reproduce more and pass on this trait to successive generations while those individuals with less antiseptic urine were less likely to pass on their genes". I sure don't want to have to say that more often than needed, so will only do so when forced into it. StuRat 16:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
And let's just say that UTIs in men, while thankfully uncommon, are pretty darn uncomfortable. To make a radical understatement. --BluePlatypus 15:13, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
The urine thing makes much more sense to me now that there has been...enlarged...debate over its antiseptic qualities. And as for the glycine bit, it's GLYCIN, not GLYCINE. Glycine is a bio-organic compound. Glycin is a chemical. I'll make the change right now, and thank you all for your help. 'Tis people like you guys that make the Reference desk the most bitchin' feature of Wikipedia. Cernen Xanthine Katrena 19:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Whoa, watch the terminology! "chemical" is a really, really useless word. :) A better description of glycin would be "an aromatic organic compound" or "a nitrophenyl ether" and glycine as an amino acid. --BluePlatypus 20:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Will AIDS spread like this????

This is in reference to a mail i got from one of my friends.. According to the mail a 10yr boy was infected with AIDS, because he ate food from a road-side dhaba(small hotel). The cook had a cut in his hand and he was infected with the virus(without his knowledge). So the blood from the cook's hand went to the food and it inturn went inside the boy causing the boy to be affected. Can this be true?? Can anyone plese confirm on this.. Thanks in advance.. --Arun Joseph

Sounds highly unlikely. If the blood ws cooked with the rest of the food, then the virus would be destroyed that way. If it fell on the food right before it was eaten, the virus could still be intact in the kid's digestive tract, but it's highly unlikely it could survive digestion and get into his bloodstream. I suppose anything is possible, say if he had a cut in his mouth and the virus got in that way, but this would be extremely rare. StuRat 12:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

All e-mailed health warnings are frauds. Valid information is disseminated by other routes. If anyone thinks this is too strong an assertion, please give a valid example of a true e-mailed health warning. alteripse 12:04, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks both of u.. I understand tht if the boy had a cut he cud be infected.. but even i cant believe abt the virus going inside the stomach and then the boy getting infected.. Thnkx much anyways.. If anyone has anything to add, please add.. and we cant just ignore such mails, Alteripse. Even if we think tht the e-mail may be fraud, we cant take risks.. and when it comes to things like AIDS, I believe no one will be taking chances.. Anyways thnkx much.. --Arun Joseph

You are welcome, but you should reconsider my advice. The nature of people and emails tells you that no new true health warnings are disseminated by email. You can ignore them. Do not propagate them-- it its the same as spreading false rumors, and people do cruel and stupid things in response to false rumors. alteripse 12:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I will first of all emphasize my strong agreement with the comments above—health warnings distributed by email forwards are universally misleading at best, and usually are junk.
To address cases of this type...it is possible to transmit HIV (the virus which causes AIDS) by consuming someone else's blood, but it is quite rare. Usually the recipient has to have an open wound or sore on or in their mouth through which the virus can enter the new host; stomach acid is a very effective disinfectant and HIV isn't a particularly durable virus. The trace amounts of blood that might be passed on inadvertantly by a food handler also would tend to count against the likelihood of this particular story—if there is a visible amount of blood on the food, most people wouldn't take it.
As StuRat noted, any blood that got on the food before cooking would be sterilized by heat. HIV won't last very long even on cold foods—the virus would tend to dry out or be inactivated by food ingredients quite rapidly. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


It should be pointed out that the variants of viral hepatitis, which are bloodborne pathogens and can be spread through the same means as HIV, have historically appeared in population clusters that have been traced to infected food preparers. As such, the possibility of this type of food vector for HIV is not as beyond the pale as the responses would imply. However, there have been no citations I have been able to find of a single instance of this having occurred. This is no doubt due to the relative fragility of the HIV virus, and its relatively low infectivity (i.e., it requires a larger innoculum of live virus to cause active disease than do the various forms of viral hepatitis).
As for email being an unreliable form of health information-- that depends on its source. With due respect to Dr. Alteripse, his point is well taken, but email is already in use for transmission of vital health information (for example, as is the case in New York City's Health Alert Network). As electronic dissemination of information becomes more pervasive-- and it will-- there will be increasing need for authentication to safeguard the credibility of this vital means of communication. Until that becomes possible, however, it is wise to view any health warnings received by email with a generous grain of salt. It is always a good idea to see whether any warnings received by email are already documented as urban legends by checking Snopes.com.--Mark Bornfeld DDS 19:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks everybody. It really was very informative. Thanks to Wikipedia for this wonderful Q&A section. --Arun Joseph

There is a temperature range at which various life forms can survive. I once asked about risk of catching AIDS and other sexually tranmitted diseases from other people sharing a hot tub like at a hotel or health club. Then there are toilet seats, in public rest rooms, that might not be cleaned between one visitor and another. Basically what I learned was that most of these diseases need to be at body temperature, and not survive long outside of body temperature. Of course there are the other diseases like SARS that can be spread by someone coughing, then the garbage turns to dust that other people can pick up various ways and get that disease. User:AlMac|(talk) 12:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
the hiv/aids virus can not live outside the body. it needs a specific temperature to remain active. nor can you contract it from a toilet seat. hiv/aids needs a port of entry into the body:ie cuts/lacerations/ulcers to be exposed and you must have direct

bodily fluid contact.

ports of entry also include lacrimol glands/tear ducts.

you can not contract hepatitis from toilet seats either. another case of a virus needing a constant temperature:(warmth)user:csi4u

One must consider, though, that any scientist that says that AIDs can spread on on a toilet seat or other methods might be barraged by gay and lesbian groups demanding his/her dismissal. --Shanedidona 02:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Transmission and distribution

Why do we connect the neutral wire of the load to the distribution transformer neutral?
[unsigned comment 12:21, 23 January 2006 by User:59.92.119.214]

Well, there's sort of two ways of answering that. (I'm not quite sure what you're asking.)

  1. What else would you expect to connect the load neutral to? You certainly wouldn't connect it to a hot lead of the distribution transformer!
  2. The residential power delivery scheme commonly used in North America (I can't speak for other situations) is single-phase, three-wire, 120/240VAC. In this system, the last transformer in the distributon chain reduces the voltage to 240V, with a center tap, and with the center tap grounded ("earthed"). The end user can derive 120V by connecting across the neutral and one or the other hot lead; or, can derive 240V for higher-power motors and appliances by connecting across the two hot leads. (Ideally this would be explained and illustrated at Electricity distribution and I could refer you there, but I see that page needs work.)

Steve Summit (talk) 15:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Windows CE .NET Compact Framework Application Development?

If there is some one out there developing .NET applications for Windows CE, you could help me. I'm evaluating the possibilities to migrate from PLC control in an application (which I would rather keep to myself which one it is) to using computers instead - and I've already done successful test "concept" applications on Windows XP using .NET Framework version 2. However, if it is possible to use Windows instead / in combination with Windows XP that could mean a cheaper/better overall solution.

I'm wondering what kind of development platform is necessary on the development PC, to develop applications for Windows CE, including deploying them to a smaller number of devices with preinstalled Windows CE 4.2 and/or 5.0. I'm trying to understand by looking at microsoft.com, but it's hard to find the right stuff there as it is such a big website, there's loads of marketingspeak, and most of the actually useful info is for the old version of Visual Studio, 2003, and I'm using 2005 standard edition. Also note that I'm mostly interested in development of applications, but I would also have to be able to install them for it really being usable. :)

I would get devices with Windows CE preinstalled. Most of the tutorials mention a program named "Platform Builder", is that really necessary for application development only? Also many of the 2003 tutorials mention that there is a Windows CE emulator in Visual Studio 2005, but it seems to have been cut (there are PocketPC emulation included though). I am also missing the "CAB Build" option that is described in the VS 2003 tutorials... Basically, any feedback would be greatly appreciated! 62.119.184.141 13:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I have VS.NET 2005 Professional and that comes with development tools for Pocket PC, as well as an emulator, but I'm not sure about Standard. enochlau (talk) 13:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
A bit of clarification: there are to some extent tools included, but I'm not sure if it's the complete needed set. However, many of the tutorials mention Platform Builder as well. Also, they mention features of VS 2003 that I just can't find in 2005... Unfortunately I don't have very much experience with Windows CE (otherwise I would hardly be asking...). 62.119.184.141 13:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Have you tried downloading the Windows Mobile SDK? —David Wahler (talk) 21:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
No, I haven't, but I'll give it a try. But it also specifically says it's for PocketPC - and I'm in the industrial automation business, and will be using industrial PCs running Windows CE... 62.119.184.141 10:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TINNITUS

HELP! i'm getting desperate. does anyone have a solution to this diagnosis.

i have had a ct, mri, abr, audiology, medication, antihistimines, with little success. all tests were negative. the sound has become so severe that it wakes me up at night and i have three distinct sound levels at the same time: hissing, ringing and bells. all sounds are different frequencies.

hearing aides for white noise did not help. tomos and panorex showed no symptomology,and i had never been exposed to loud noise so that rules out structural deviation.

so what do i do? i'm becoming very frustrated and agitated due to the constant noise.

jackie.

Well, I'm no medical doctor, but I've heard that some people have had tinnitus caused by jaw problems, and some have been able to gain relief through jaw adjustment, exercises and/or muscle relaxants on the jaw muscle. --BluePlatypus 15:09, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, the temporomandibular joint causes a lot of problems. I think it's one of the worst designed joints of the human body, along with the knee. —Keenan Pepper 15:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
If it is a TMJ problem, you have two options: Go spend a lot of money with a doctor to get a prescribed mouthpiece to wear at night - or - go buy a standard mouthpiece from any sports store that can be fitted (usually by putting it hot water and then biting down on it). TMJ problems are commonly caused by tension at night. The mouthpiece will keep you from being able to bite all the way down, which forces the TMJ to relax.
However, I'd also look at ear infections as a source. I came back from Norway with a nasty ringing in my ears. After a few months, I used some eardrops for an ear infection and it went away. --Kainaw (talk) 16:52, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Make sure you aren't taking any meds which contain aspirin, although your problems sound beyond those typically caused by that. Also check all the other meds you regularly take (including birth control) for any mention of tinnitus as a side effect. You might also want to look each up on the internet as it may still cause tinnitus and just not have it listed.

You didn't say whether it's in both ears or one. If just one, I would think that would indicate a problem with the ear itself or the immediate surroundings, such as a partially blocked eustachian tube. StuRat 16:05, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


I Thank everyone for their answers. all avenues will be investigated. the ringing is bilateral, tomos and panorex (xrays) of the jaw ruled out tmj. will persue it though.

[edit] My user page

On my user page I have the babel box and a map of where I live. I want both to be the same size and they are in Firefox, but not in Internet Explorer. Why is this and how do I fix it? Thanks, Gerard Foley 15:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Why doesn't this suprise me? Probably due to IE trying to change the size of the divs (when it shouldn't be allowed to) - Make sure all layers are given an exact width/height e.g 100px (and don't use IE!) -Benbread 16:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but a problem is many others do use IE. In this case you could just say "fuck 'm", but if you are really serious about getting a page right (ie for a business) you have to make it works at least for the most used browsers. Which, alas, includes IE. DirkvdM 19:33, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
You can't really blame IE for having annoying features like that. They're mostly remnants from a time when people didn't bother with formatting as much, and it was up to the browsers standard to handle a lot of the values by default. Doesn't mean we should just ignore them though. freshgavin TALK 04:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
If only Microsoft would have adhered to the standards, that would have made life a lot simpler for the standard-makers, who were forced to decide if they should include a fait-accompli. Luckily this didn't happen for the stupid <blink>blink-tag</blink>. That said, Netscape did similar things. Only later browsers like Mozilla (and Opera too, I believe) stuck to the standards. DirkvdM 13:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes IE is crap, but does anyone know what I can do about my user page? Gerard Foley 18:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The 7 Seas.

Could you please tell me the names of the seven different seas.(bodies of water). Thank You.Nlljj5 at aol dot com 15:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

See Seven Seas. —Keenan Pepper 15:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Research against the einstein's theory

i remember my friends some months back discussing about a BBC program in which theyintervewed a professor from prbably a US university, who along with other students was researching to prove einstein's theory wrong. all i remember is that he discussed something about orange particles which can travel faster than the speed of light. i searched on wikipedia but dint get a clue. F1 F1 [help help ;)] --Muhammad Hamza 15:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

To which theory are you referring, the General Theory of Relativity, the Special Theory of Relativity, or something else ? Most of Einstein's theories are well proven by now, such as the impressive visual proof of E = mc^2 in an atomic bomb. StuRat 17:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Eh, there are a lot more subtle verifications of General Relativity than that. For example the Global Positioning System adjusts for time-dialation to due the earth's gravitation, and it works rather nicely. There is no serious research working on proving that Relativity is wrong, although there is of course research in extending it. -- SCZenz 17:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
What, a mushroom cloud isn't subtle enough for you ? LOL StuRat 17:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
It appears the questioner is asking if anyone has proven that something can travel faster than the speed of light. See the "faster than light" section is Speed of light. --Kainaw (talk) 17:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Tachyons are hypothetical particles that travel faster than light; they are not known to exist however. Nor do they contradict Einstein, however they may be impossible for other reasons. For Relativity see Tests of general relativity for conventional point of view. For Anti-Einstein point of view, there are many websites claimning such. eg Autodynamics, aetherometry.com, many others, just google around. GangofOne 01:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The guy on TV you are talking about was probably the Variable speed of light fellow, João Magueijo who wrote a big bestseller book four years ago, got al ot of press, but the media has since lost interest in him. --Fastfission 03:51, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Health hazards of laptops

Is there any study that points out health hazards of keeping a laptop on the top of yourself while working day after day? deeptrivia (talk) 17:10, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

The low power level and LCD display seem to make EM radiation much less of an issue than with a desktop PC. I would think the most likely injury would be from bending over to use it or carpal tunnel syndrome from the keyboard. StuRat 17:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
There have also been a few documented cases of minor burns from keeping a warm laptop directly on your lap. You're much better off with a tray or table between you and the laptop—for men especially. (Excess heat harms sperm; your testicles hang down away from the body to keep them cool, and the ancient Egyptians sometimes used a hot bath before sex for birth control.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but none of us want User:deeptrivia to reproduce anyway. LOL. J/K. StuRat 20:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Haha..LOL! deeptrivia (talk) 21:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

BBC News: Laptops May Damage Male Fertility [90] --JianLi 01:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How to find a telephone number

I have a friend in Pittsburgh but I don't know his telephone number or address. I just know his name. How do I find his telephone number? Also, if I have a number, is it possible to find out the name? I don't have access to phone books because I live in India.

You could try Google Phonebook. joturner 19:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ball lightning and crop circles

How does ball lightning and crop circles occur?

ball lightning (disputably) occurs due to certain atmospheric conditions. crop circles occur due to people with planks of wood, string, creativity and a lot of time on their hands going out into fields at night. --Noodhoog 19:29, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I suppose whirlwinds could also be the culprit in some crop circles. StuRat 20:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

well i saw a video on Discovery channel that showed an actual crop circle that formaed when a ball of light passed over it n the night --84.11.108.4 17:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

The drunk farmer with the plank had a mining helmet on when he made it. freshgavin TALK 04:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] animal sexuality

Are there homosexuals among animals? If not, why?

Offhand, I know that Bonobos will have sex with anything that moves, and most things that don't. I also seem to recall that someone won an IgNobel prize a few years back for documenting a case of homosexual necrophilia in the mallard. I'm sure there are plenty of other cases. GeeJo (t) (c) • 19:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
[91] —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:22, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
This article states that "birds, reptiles, mammals and even snails engage in same-sex sexual activities." - Akamad 19:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia has always seemed to have a penchant for attracting people who like to make lists of things, regardless of if they're useful or not. I'll leave that up to you to decide. Without further ado, I present you with: List of animals practicing homosexual behavior. --BluePlatypus 20:33, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
That's hilarious. It belongs on WP:UA :) GeeJo (t) (c) • 21:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
And now it's there! GeeJo (t) (c) • 21:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
There was (still is?) a famous pair of geese at a zoo (in Canada, IIRC) which were nicknamed Gertrude and Alice (after Stein and Toklas) by their keepers when it became obvious they, um, weren't interested in ganders. Grutness...wha? 22:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, there is the case of the gay penguins. --Robert Merkel 23:57, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

A good documentary on the subject is Dr Tatiana's Sex Guide to All Creation, based on the book by evolutionary biologist Olivia Judson.--nixie 02:43, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

That 'List of animals practicing homosexual behavior' even features the 'queen butterfly'. Cute! DirkvdM 19:40, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Ehm , that requires a litte more explaining. The Spanish word for 'butterfly', 'mariposa', has the same meaning as 'queen' in English in this sense. DirkvdM 19:45, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, in French butterfly is "pappillon", in German it's "schmetterling", in Dutch it's "vlinder", in Portuguese it's "borboleta". It seems odd that it apparently has a completely unrelated word origin in all those languages. StuRat 07:15, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
One species that I found interesting was the Desert Grassland Whiptail lizard. The species is comprised solely of females, but they practice mating rituals to enhance ovulation. Dimblethum 23:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Earth's magnetic poles

Why do the polarities of earth's magnetic field reverse?

See Geomagnetic reversal :) GeeJo (t) (c) • 19:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You're all robots!

Is there a specific name for the condition of being under the belief that your friends, family, or other specific people are impostors (actors, clones, robots, pod-people, or similar) who are either keeping the real ones somewhere or have killed them? I checked the pages on paranoia, schizophrenia and delusions, and even invasion of the body snatchers, but couldn't find any mention of this particular condition. --Noodhoog 19:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

See Capgras delusion :) GeeJo (t) (c) • 19:32, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Beep! --GraemeL (talk) 19:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Ha! I knew it! No human could have answered so quickly. Thankyou, oh wikipedian artificial hive-mind. --Noodhoog 19:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

You must be mistaken. There is no Hive Mind! GeeJo (t) (c) • 19:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
That's what the cabal wants you to think! Cernen Xanthine Katrena 07:21, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm a dolphin, not a robot. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Gah!! Just as I pulled up this section to read it, the intro to "One Note Song" by Tenacious D [92] started playing in WinAmp. Totally freaked out right now... --PeruvianLlama(spit) 17:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] salman rushdie

What was the subject matter of Salman Rushdie's controversial novel The Satanic Verses?

Try looking under, oh, I don't know, The Satanic Verses maybe ? StuRat 19:52, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

When asked about his unusual first name, Salman replied "My father was an avid fisherman. Still, I fared better than my sister Bigmouth and my brother Crappie." LOL. StuRat 19:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Is his name actually pronounced as the fish? I've heard his name said before (in Canada) and I've always thought it was Sahl-man Rush-dee. freshgavin TALK 05:24, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
That's true. StuRat 07:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Then I guess ... lucky for him : ). freshgavin TALK 07:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps the joke would work better if we were talking about Salmon P. Chase, whose name is at least spelled the same as the fish. I believe the L is pronounced there, too. Only the fish seems to have a silent L. But then, how many other words have a silent L ? StuRat 07:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
"Palm", depending on how you pronounce it (I pronounce the L, but many don't). Ian Holm? Folk/yolk/talk/walk? That's all I can think of offhand. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:32, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Balm, calm, qualm, realm (oops!). And of course the second 'l' in words like 'ball'. DirkvdM 19:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
You could argue that the L exists in influencing the pronounciation. I certainly don't think of cam when I say calm. The strength of the L sound depends on your accent though. By the way realm isn't included in this, the L is quite pronounced. freshgavin TALK 04:42, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Which is why I said 'oops'. Might have added a smiley. So here it is. :) DirkvdM 13:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I pronounce the L in palm, balm, calm, qualm and realm. In all of those other words, it does affect the pronounciation..."foke", "yoke", "tawk", "wawk". StuRat 06:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Sure it affects the pronunciation, but letters don't have to be sounded to affect pronunciation. "Hat" and "hate" are pronounced differently, although the e is silent. The l is still silent in "yolk" and "talk". There will be numerous examples of letters affecting pronunciation even if they are not making their usual sound due to English's sometimes bizarre and chaotic pronunciation patterns. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I think "yolk" is perhaps the most convincing of these - I've never heard an accent where that 'l' was audible, unlike "folk", "talk", etc, which have quite varied pronunciation. However, it was presumably pronounced once to have been standardised to that spelling, unless it was by erroneous connection to something else... - IMSoP 16:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Salman is a Muslim name and its pronounced Sull(like dull) - maaan(the a is pronounced like in yarn)

[edit] Unencrypted Network Connection

When confirming an e-commerce transaction my browser presented a message stating the data would be sent over an unencrypted network connection. The lock symbol was visible on the right hand side of the bottom bar in XP.

What does the message really indicate about the security of the transaction? Is there anything I must do or this a security problem at the vendor's end?

Gloria

--64.220.183.164 21:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

The page you were viewing might have been using SSL, but that does not guarantee all communications with the host are secure. If your browser warned you it might be insecure, then it probably is. Your best course of action would be to hold off completing the transaction until you get a response from the other party about the security of the link. Tzarius 22:32, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Sometimes the confusion results from an html page which otherwise uses the https protocol, but has a form on it which is not SSL. (There are also examples of the opposite-- an unencrypted page that has a secure form with an method such as post https:...) If you examine the page properties (most browsers will allow this), it will list the properties of the form. If the form action is to post using http rather than https, the browser will issue an alert because form is not secure and should not be used.--Mark Bornfeld DDS 23:26, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "pod" means what?

What does "pod" as in "ipod" or "pod casting" stand for?

As far as I'm aware it's not actually an acronym, just a name that Apple's marketing division thought up. Interestingly, however, since the term "podcasting" came into common use for scheduled audio downloads from the web, the Creative company (who also manufacture MP3 players) have tried to redefine it as standing for "Personal On Demand cast". However, the term originally came from the act of downloading these shows to an iPod. Finally, I can't help but mention I consider "podcast" to be the worst term the 'net has spewed out since "information superhighway". --Noodhoog 23:09, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

pod --Zeizmic 01:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

The applicable "pod" definition from www.m-w.com is: "a usually protective container or housing", as in a protective container for music, in this case. By contrast, a CD is music in a non-protective container. This is why CDs must be put inside a CD case, to prevent scratches, etc., which might ruin the music. An iPod is a bit more durable than that. StuRat 06:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
"pod" when used as part of a word in its origional sense, means foot; for example: podiatry

Dragoon235 04:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Before the Big Bang

I've heard that time and space didn't exist before the Big Bang.I've also heard that, before the Big Bang, there was an infinitely dense point of matter called a singularity.But then, how can there be a singularity(or anything) before the Big Bang if time didn't exist?I've heard that the Big Bang was caused by quantum fluctuations.But without space and time, how can there be quantum fluctuations or any other physical processes?

Media:User:Bowei

I'm certainly no physicist, but a while back I heard an interesting analogy regarding time before the big bang. Imagine you started travelling south, eventually you would hit the south pole. Then what happens if you try to go south from there? You can't. It's not that there's a wall in your way or anything like that, simply that there is no such thing as south from there, it doesn't exist. Apparently that's vaguely similar to how it is with time and the big bang - time before the big bang doesn't exist. Again, however, I will stress this is just "an interesting analogy that I heard once", and I'm not even remotely qualified to say whether it's meaningful, or just utter tripe. --Noodhoog 23:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, the singularity was at the big bang. At point zero so to speak, not before it. I don't think the BB was caused by quantum fluctuations though. Noone knows exactly what happened then since the current model of physics really breaks down completely. --BluePlatypus 23:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Testicular pain

Testicular pain currently redirects to orchitis, although web search indicates that this is only one possible cause. There is no article testicle pain. Anyway, my question is whether a week of mild testicular pain in the absence of any other symptom (no abdominal pain, no fever, no discharge, no recent trauma, et cetera) is reason to see a physician. Thanks. 128.220.220.95 23:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

That's the sort of question we can't answer, because we're not physicians. You could perhaps call your physician's office and ask them...? -- SCZenz 01:04, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
And those of us who might be physicians agree with that advice. Testicular pain for a week isnt a sore throat and there isnt a common, "oh it's probably just XX, and it will be better in a couple of days." Make an appt for a few days from now and try some ibuprofen for 2 days and then stop, and the response to the ibuprofen will be a useful piece of information that will not screw up any of the diagnostic issues. If it is severely painful or swollen go directly to the ER. alteripse 02:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Thank you very much. This is very helpful. 128.220.220.95 16:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
It's amazing... Wikipedia has all kinds of people, including physicians! But should we really be dispensing this kind of advice here? It might discourage people from visiting the doctor in real life. enochlau (talk) 06:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
We could create Wikipedia:Reference desk/Medical_emergency and people could ask questions like, "omg my armz r bleding wut do i do lolz," or "Help my hair is on fire, will that turn its mass into energy?" Cernen Xanthine

Katrena 07:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Most physicians are very careful about dispensing medical advice over the internet or phone. I'm sure a Wikepedia medical reference desk would be swamped by people (proabably uninsured Americans) looking for free medical advice. Cybergoth 22:37, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like you're going to the doctor, so good for you. If your tests don't turn up anything, try wearing a jockstrap when you exercise. — BrianSmithson 19:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Black holes and energy-to-matter conversion

Hello. Two physics questions:

  • If nothing ever comes out of black holes, will everything eventually be sucked inside them?
  • I can think of many ways of transforming matter to energy, from fire to matter-antimatter annihilation. Yet I can't think of one way to convert energy to matter. Can someone give me some example?

Thanks! -- ironcito 23:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

No, I don't think everything will be sucked inside eventually. First, there's light, nothing moves faster than light in vacuum, including gravity, so light headed away from a black hole will never be 'sucked in'. Second, black holes are just like any other gravitational object: You can fall into a stable orbit around it, just like with a planet or sun. Of course, most black holes are spinning and have so much junk in their orbits that they form Accretion disks, where the stuff in orbit collides and slows down and eventually falls in. Also, things do get out of black holes, namely Hawking radiation, so the survival question is really if the black hole will be able to suck things in faster than the Hawking radiation is emitted or vice-versa. As for question 2, that's what high-energy particle accelerators are for. (BTW, fire doesn't turn matter into energy, you have the same amount of matter before and after) --BluePlatypus 00:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. Fire does not convert mass into energy. If you added up the weight of the ashes and gases created, they would exactly equal the starting materials. This common misperception is due to only weighing the ashes. If the weight of the gases had been converted into energy, the resulting explosion would be around 10,000 times the detonation energy of a nuclear weapon with the same mass of fissible material and would likely rupture the Earth's crust. In a fire the energy in chemical bonds is changed into free energy. StuRat 06:42, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Um, no. Fire does convert matter to energy, just not very much. E = mc2 holds for all reactions, not just nuclear reactions. However, in all but nuclear reactions, the energies involved are small enough that the c2 term dominates, resulting in a mass change so tiny as to be immeasureable and, in efffect, negligible. (c2 is of course a really big number.)
If you made a little fire that released 1 kcal of energy (enough to heat 1 liter of water 1 degree Centigrade), and if you weighed the ashes and all the soot and CO2 and all the other products afterwards, you'd find that they were lighter by something like 4.7 x 10-11 grams, or 47 picograms. But you wouldn't really "find" this, because it's much too small to measure; it's about a million times lighter than the best analytical balance can weigh.
But since E = mc2 everywhere, it means it's just as easy for any of us to convert energy back into mass -- again, just not very much of it. For example, if I do some work which involves applying a force of one pound over a distance of one foot, I will have expended about 1.4 Joules of energy. If the work involves compressing a spring, and if we could weigh it accurately enough afterwards, we would find that because of the stored energy it was 1.5 x 10-14 grams heavier, or 15 femtograms.
Steve Summit (talk) 16:36, 24 January 2006 (UTC) [Disclaimer: I'm not a physicist; some of my numbers here might be wrong.]
What? No. Fire does not involve the release of elementary particles from atoms, it's just an exothermic chemical reaction that typically involves oxygen. And potential energy (such as the compressed spring) does not add mass. Heat does not add mass (until you get the individual particles moving relatavistically). Relatavistic motion adds mass. Tzarius 22:26, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Steve Summit is right. E=mc^2 applies to all reactions, including chemical rxn like combustion. Fire releases heat, which is kinetic energy and photons. Photons are particles which is the "release of elementary particles from atoms" if you want to think of it that way. In combustion, binding energy is broken , then reformed, just less than was broken; it's just chemical binding energy. In a nuclear rxn. it's nuclear binding energy, but the concept is the same. A compressed spring is more massive than an uncompressed spring. If I have enough to equal the energy release of a nuclear explosio, and I explode them, then the springs have the mass of the uncompressed springs, then were did all the energy come from? The uranium nucleus is alot like a compressed spring. Relativistic motion or not has nothing to do with it. (By the way, relativity is true at all speeds. It's just too small to measure at low speeds.) If you don't believe what I say, than ask around , or argue. Maybe your teachers are lying to you. GangofOne 01:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks fer stickin up fer me there, Gango. :-) Tzarius, there's a very nice explanation of what I'm talking about in the excellent book The Ring of Truth, by the late Philip Morrison, written as a companion to the PBS television series of the same name. So far, the only source I've found on the web is http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/chem03/chem03534.htm, which says that people like me are being "cute" in our arguments (a charge which I'll have to cop to), but we're not wrong. Basically, nowhere is it written that E = mc2 applies only to nuclear reactions, or only to reactions in which entire elementary particles are created or destroyed -- it applies to all reactions. And when you've got potential energy stored in a system, how do you know it's there? It's not there just because you say it is. In effect, the way the universe keeps track of it -- "remembers" that it's there, if you will -- is by recording it as actual mass. Steve Summit (talk) 02:22, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
No again. Chemical reactions do not convert ANY mass to energy. For example, the combustion of oxygen and hydrogen to make water (and release energy) looks like this:
2H2 + O2 -> 2H2O
There are the same number of atoms on both sides of the equation, and each has the same number of protons, nuetrons, and electrons (and thus the same total mass). The energy is released since the reactants have a higher energy state in their chemical bonds than the resulting water.
In the case of the compression or expansion of a spring, or any elastic material for that matter, the energy released was potential energy in stretched or compressed chemical bonds. These bonds are formed with electrons. In the conventional model these were described as spheres in orbit about the nucleus. The orbits can temporarily be forced inward or outward by application of a force, but will "want" to reestablish the original orbital distance once the force is removed. This same effect can be seen in satellites we put in orbit around the Earth. If we try to move them to a higher or lower orbit without changing their orbital speed they just return to the stable orbit for that speed. Current quantum mechnics theory of electrons is far more complex than the simple model I used here, but basically arrives at the same result. StuRat 06:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I read that link, and this ("an electric field has mass which will seem to be stuck to the object holding the charges that originated it.") made sense in that odd kind of way. But then I got down to Roberto Gregorius' reply, and he knocks it all down again. (I also read Binding energy, and that makes sense to me). So I want to make another couple of examples: First one is two gasses, one at low pressure/large volume and the other at high pressure/small volume (both same Mole count). The compressed gas obviously has more energy to do work (in a vacuum), but I don't see how crowding atoms loosely together will add to the mass-energy.
The second example is a magnet, in two time-seperated states - non-magnetised, and magnetised. Non-magnetised, the magnetic domains are not uniformly arranged, whereas in the magnetised state most of them point in a single direction. The magnetised metal has more potential energy, but how does the orientation of the domains increase their mass?
Sorry if I'm missing something completely obvious, but I just don't see the relationship... Tzarius 06:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
There is nothing to be sorry about. You are entirely correct that no mass is converted to energy in ordinary chemical or physical reactions. StuRat 06:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh joyous day, a day when one can learn something new. This came up before, at Wikipedia:Reference_desk_archive/Science/January_2006#inventing_a_source_of_perpetual_energy. I looked at the link above from www.newton.dep.anl.gov, a site for K-12 educators, and they , overall, have a jumble of misunderstandings, so it's no surprize that the jumble of misunderstandings is passed on to the new generation. You say 2H2 + O2 -> 2H2O has the same number of protons, neutrons and electrons on each side of the eqn. Let's look at a typical fission rxn n + 235U -> 141Ba + 92Kr + 3n. In this case also there are the same number of protons, neutrons, and electrons, yet energy is released E=mc^2, and that m is the mass defect of products minus reactants..... So, what about the chemical rxn? I say the same applies. THere is a "mass defect" in the products. How so? Have we actually accounted for all the particles? What about the "particles of exchange" in the binding energy, aka the "gauge bosons", that is the source of the binding energy? If I compress a spring, I force atoms closer. There are more exchange photons, more energy, more mass. More later GangofOne 20:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
But a nuclear reaction also releases non-virtual photons as a result of the loss of binding energy... Tzarius 01:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
True, but I not sure what point you're making. In both a chemical rxn and nuclear rxn the resultant particles' kinetic energy and the energy of released photons, together divided by c^2, gives the "mass defect" of the rxn. GangofOne 00:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Interesting! Obviously thought-experiment is not enough to come to a conclusion, we must seek out experimental evidence! By chance, is there some kind of short phrase or keyword that sums up this whole business? Tzarius 23:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Part 1: no, for two reasons. firstly, astronomers currently believe the universe is accelerating its expansion, so matter cannot all fall into a single black hole. Secondly, Hawking radiation comes out of black holes. Part 2, particle-antiparticle pair creation is the standard example (which incidentally is the cause of Hawking radiation) Modest Genius 00:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 24

[edit] Pluto

I read somewhere that if the ship for Pluto was not started before like the 4th of February, it wouldnt be able to launch for another five years. Why is that? Thanks Zach 01:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

The plan is to get a boost from Jupiter, see New Horizons. --JWSchmidt 02:10, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
For "boost", see gravitational slingshot. The reason is simply that, as the planets move, after February 14 the probe would not have enough fuel to reach Jupiter on an alignment that would enable it to reach Pluto afterwards. --Anonymous, 04:35 UTC, January 24.
I don't think what you read was correct:
According to our New Horizons article right before the launch, it could have launched after February 4, but it would not have been able to get a gravity assist (or as good of a gravity assist), so it would have to arrive years later. If it missed the 2006 window completely, there would have been another launch window in 2007. --AySz88^-^ 06:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Got it Thanks, I didnt understand but now I do!!! Zach 00:11, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome, and thank you! Enjoy Wikipedia! --AySz88^-^ 03:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hurricanes and Typhoons

In 1900, a hurricane struck the Texan town of Galveston.Well, Houston is very close to Galveston.So how much was Houston affected by the Galveston Hurricane of 1900?

Note that the large number of deaths in Galveston was because they built homes on a sandbar. Building homes on a sandbar in "hurricane alley" is beyond stupid. StuRat 06:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

And how much was Houston affected by Hurricane Rita?

Why is 119km/hr considered the minimum wind speed for a hurricane?

How often on average do North Atlantic hurricanes occur?How often do typhoons occur?

I've heard that typhoons are usually much stronger than Atlantic hurricanes.Is that true?

When was the last time a typhoon struck the following places:Hong Kong,Shanghai,Osaka,Tokyo?

  1. The damage to Galveston was mainly from the storm surge, and storm surges do not travel very far inland. Galveston was the larger city at the time, so it had more buildings to be damaged and more people to be killed.
  2. Not very much. See Hurricane Rita.
  3. That's where Saffir and Simpson set it. Why, I'm not sure; possibly because it's the point at which such storms start to do widespread damage.
  4. See Tropical cyclone#Locations of formation, which has some data on this.
  5. The largest and strongest tropical cyclones on record were NW Pacific typhoons, but I don't know if, on average, they're any stronger.
  6. Typhoon York hit Hong Kong in 1999, Typhoon Matsa hit Shanghai in 2005, Typhoon Tokage hit Osaka in 2004, and Typhoon Mawar grazed Tokyo in 2005.

—Charles P. (Mirv) 02:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

On question 3, the threshold originally comes from when the Beaufort Scale began to be interpreted in terms of specific wind speeds: see that article. (I'm not sure if the numbers given there article are exactly right, though; most sources show the minimum speed for a hurricane slightly higher. Unfortunately, because the speeds are typically rounded to whole numbers in any of three different units, errors are often introduced when the table is copied.) --Anonymous, 04:40 UTC, January 24.

Two points, living in Tokyo I usually hear that hurricanes are considered stronger than typhoons, and though I haven't seen any figures I'd like to agree with that. There are usually close to 20 (named) typhoons in the typhoon season every year, and in fact quite a few of them hit Tokyo and Osaka (there is a fair chance that it could hit both cities). Tokyo was hit/grazed/passed over at least 2 times last season (fall, 2005) but it depends on what you mean by 'hit'. I don't believe there was any major damage in south East Japan this year, maybe some minor flood damage. freshgavin TALK 05:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Powerful typhoons occur far more frequently than Atlantic hurricanes of the same strength. Take a look at List of notable tropical cyclones#Most intense storms on record, where we had to stop listing the typhoons to give some hurricanes from other basins a chance to be represented in relative strength. The top 13 tropical cyclones are all typhoons, and an Atlantic hurricane doesn't appear until number 19 (Wilma).
I'm fairly certain that 2005 is the first year on record when there was more Atlantic named storms than Pacific named storms. On average, there are 11.8 named storms (5.9 hurricanes) a year in the Atlantic, compared with 31.8 storms (17.5 typhoons) a year in the Pacific. (from a table on Dr. Master's blog)
Make sure you don't confuse between Pacific hurricanes (generally, nearer to Mexico) and Pacific typhoons (near Asia). --AySz88^-^ 06:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Freshgavin: I'm very surprised that people in Japan think hurricanes are stronger. Perhaps you're better-prepared, so our hurricanes do more damage? --AySz88^-^ 06:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I merely said that I often hear that hurricanes are more powerful, the opinion of the average Tokyo citizen is thus. Presumably because of the way the media presents hurricanes in Japan. Then again, many Tokyo citizens will tell you that Hawaii is bigger than the Japan! I have no opinion; I'm from Toronto and have never experienced a hurricane before. It may be that the Japanese are better prepared ... at least in terms of emergency response. freshgavin TALK 07:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I guess we Americans aren't the only ones who are bad at geography. StuRat 21:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Love-causing Hormones (cont.)

I know that the the beautiful a woman is, the more likely other men will fall in love with her.But what if the 3 women the man meets are equally beautiful?

Well everyone has personal tastes. One of the women might be more to the man's liking - a brunette instead of a blonde. But if they're triplets - to continue the hypothetical - or even if not but they are all judged equally attractive by the man, other factors will come into play: personality, level of interest they express to him, and so on.
It's impossible for the 3 women to be equally beautiful. There's bound to be differences between the women, since no two individually are identitical. He will therefore be most likely to fall in love with the most beautiful of the 3.
Of course, this doesn't tell all that much about hormones and love. Yes there's an element of the psychological - the personal taste, which is likely in part psychological - but hormones (or more properly our long genetic inheritance) also plays a major role in what personality traits we find attractive. There's just no sensible way to absolutely disentangle the physical and the psychological here. (Of course, the two aren't that different anywa, but I digress.) Humans are more complicated than that. --George 01:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
It's whichever one has the shortest skirt. Fact. Proto t c 11:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
But don't ignore Jimmy Soul's take on this topic. --Shantavira 13:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hurricanes & Typhoons (cont.)

Imagine if a hurricane struck New York City!Well, how likely is it that a hurricane will strike New York?Is New York in place where it's likely to be hit by a hurricane?

When was the last time a typhoon struck Beijing and Tianjing?

A hurricane did strike New York City in 1893. Two more (in 1938 and in 1944) just missed it. So no, New York City is not likely to be struck by a hurricane, but it certainly could be. —Charles P. (Mirv) 02:29, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
New York is struck by hurricane remnants much more often, but actual hurricane strength winds and storm surge are rare, as hurricanes typically reduce in strength as they head that far north. A large amount of rain is typically all they get in NY from a hurricane. StuRat 06:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm reminded of a Lewis Black quote (I'll paraphrase): "They [The Weather Channel] said that [Hurricane Floyd] was headed for the east coast and that it would hit somewhere between Miami and New England. Why the f*ck open your mouth? Why not just say 'Hey, Hurricane Floyd's coming and, uh...we're going to go to commercial.'" Cernen Xanthine Katrena 07:42, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] pulmonary parenchyma

Hi,

I would just like to know what pulmonary parenchyma is in regards to community aquired pneumonia. I know CAP is an acute infection of the pulmonary parenchyma.

Thanks

Amit

Pulmonary parenchyma is what we call lung tissue when you pay us $250. alteripse 03:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

or $127.50 CDN in Ontario. Cybergoth 22:40, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I think your conversion is backwards. Canadian dollars are worth less than US dollars, so you would need more of them to equal the same amount, not fewer of them. StuRat 17:05, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
You missed the point - Canadian physicians are paid much less than physicians in the USA. Cybergoth 01:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I get it now. StuRat 05:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] windows server 2003

What are the driver signing options in 2003 server?

A rather unclear question, that; however, I offer you Microsoft Windows 2003, Driver signing, and Drivers. Cernen Xanthine Katrena 07:24, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
And of course, I r t3h sux0rz, and none of those articles exist. Sorry to be a bother. Cernen Xanthine Katrena 07:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
It's Windows Server 2003. Proto t c 10:58, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brain wave experiments

I remember watching a documentary about the brain a while back that gave some information on an experiment (I believe by 2 amateur scientists) in sharing brainwaves (for the hell of it). I think the experiment was performed in the late 70s or 80s, and it was probably done with the pretext that it might be possible to enduce telepathy by amplifying brain patterns. I don't remember details of the experiment, other than the fact that it may have done with both subjects simultaneously or with recorded brain waves from one subject, and the results were simply that the brain couldn't handle/understand the input and the scientists were rather disturbed by the experience, so they gave up.

It might not have been simply brain waves, now that I think about it. freshgavin TALK 05:37, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Lawl, wtf. There's no question here! Cernen Xanthine Katrena 08:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I think FG is asking for the name of the documentary. Or perhaps for information on Brain waves? GeeJo (t) (c) • 08:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Do you know that brainwave frequency increases when we catch the punchline of a joke? KILO-LIMA 18:04, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Oops - -; I forgot to actually ask the question. Yes has anyone heard of this experiment or one like it? There is no useful information on this particular train of thought on Brain waves or articles related to it. freshgavin TALK 23:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like the fictional movie Brainstorms GangofOne 01:15, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
It wasn't : (. It was definitely TLC or Discovery Channel. freshgavin TALK 04:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bascillus Subtilius

How is bascillus subtilius growth affected by the change of dettol pH.

  • According to our dettol article, pH has nothing to do with it. The bacteria are killed because they can't handle alcohol. - Mgm|(talk) 11:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Also the bacteria you want is spelled Bacillus subtilis. It can cause food poisoning, but I don't think you'll be using dettol in your food!!! - Nunh-huh 03:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Is it a particularly subtle bacteria ? StuRat 09:03, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] computer

What is print routine?

You may be interested in computer software whose function includes printing. User:AlMac|(talk) 13:04, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Though it's not a routine, it sounds like you might want to read printf as well. Dismas|(talk) 23:10, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TSR program

What is a TSR program and what are its applications?

Please, see Terminate and Stay Resident. Don't forget to check the Wikipedia before asking for help! Mariano(t/c) 12:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I'll create TSR program as a re-direct to Terminate and Stay Resident. ike9898 20:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Alas! TSR already exists to that redirection. We also need Terminate and Stay resident Program, terminate & stay Resident Prog., ... ---DLL 22:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
If the redirects were handled a little bit more efficiently (pseudo redirects and the like) a bot could do that automatically. freshgavin TALK 04:49, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Einstein

Can u explain the special and general theory of relativity and the concept of curved space in detail?

We already did! See Special relativity and General relativity. Next time use the search box at the left. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 12:48, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Antimatter

What is antimatter and what do you mean by matter-antimatter annihilation and what is a particle generator and is it true that matter was created from nothing?

See antimatter, annihilation and electron-positron annihilation, particle accelerator, particle collider and pair production. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 12:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
And if you can't understand any of that, antimatter is the opposite of matter and if you can find some antimatter and put it in contact with its respective matter than it creates a big fuss called matter-antimatter annihilation. It is not true that matter was created from nothing, and yes, there's a boogyman in your closet, but I'm not going to explain why. freshgavin TALK 04:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
The "big fuss" is that all the mass would change into an immense amount of energy, on the order of 10,000 times more than a nuclear bomb with the same mass of fissible material, since in nuclear bombs only about 1/10,000 of the fissible mass is converted to energy. The amount of energy produced is described by Einstein's E = mc2. StuRat 05:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Which makes one wonder how the Italians get away with serving antipasta .... --Blowdart 13:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
You just have to be careful not to let it ever touch any pasta, LOL. StuRat 09:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] einsteins theory of relativity

could someone please explain to this lay person the quotion E=MC^2 in simplistic terms. i was under the impression it referred to time travel, however, some of the men i work with indicate it refers to time standing still. which is it?

many thanks, jaclyn

It has nothing to do with time travel.

  • the E means Energy
  • the M means mass (physical material)
  • the C means the speed of light
  • the 2 means C squared
  • thus if you have a tiny amount of mass, like the inside of a nuclear bomb, the amount of energy released by exploding it is equal to the mass times speed of light twice User:AlMac|(talk) 13:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
    Well, it's not the original mass, but the mass lost in the process (that mass turns into energy). Mariano(t/c) 14:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Some people are really nice here, and then there's me. You must be in the same class as the person two doors up. The Magic Answer Box is always ready for you. Try it with 'Einstein' and follow the links. It's fun! --Zeizmic 13:11, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

thank you (almac) for your excellent response. to zeizmic- so i'm scientifically challenged, "TO KNOW WHAT YOU KNOW AND TO KNOW WHAT YOU DON'T KNOW ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF ONE WHO KNOWS!

Actually, Zeizmic's response agrees with you. It's akin to the "give a man a fish/teach a man to fish" thing, because "know[ing] what you don't know" (aside from sounding much like Donald Rumsfeld) is fairly useless until you know how to learn what you don't know. To wit, the caps lock key is to your left. — Lomn Talk 15:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
It is not a matter of "knowing". It is a matter of taking responsibility for yourself. Zeizmic simply stated that there is a pretty little search box that you could have used. Instead, you asked everyone else to search for you and give you the answer. --Kainaw (talk) 15:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I DON'T EXPECT ANYONE TO DO MY WORK FOR ME. I AM NEW TO THE SYSTEM, FIRST DAY EVER USED IT WAS THE DAY QUESTION WAS POSTED. obviously you have little patience with people not as *capable* as you.

Well, you read the instructions well enough to find the reference desk and then post correctly. Most of us don't consider it a stretch to read the please search first instructions. Basically, the reference desk stays fairly busy and we prefer that people attempt to answer their own questions before coming here. — Lomn Talk 19:29, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
We also prefer that people manning the reference desk be polite to those asking for help, and move on silently if they aren't disposed to help them at the moment. - Nunh-huh 03:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

thank-you for that(Nunh-huh)

Except maybe to point out that it would be nice if people DIDN'T SHOUT. DirkvdM 13:49, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

not being and internet user i forgot that capitals mean shouting,humble apologies.

Yes, using upper case is considered a capital offence here. StuRat 19:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
And being bold does not mean bold. And being Italian is no excuse to write in all italics. Nor is being big an excuse ... well, you get the idea. :) DirkvdM 20:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
By the way, no-one seems to have pointed out to you that E=mc² is not either of Einstein's theories of relativity, it's Einstein's Mass-Energy Relation. --Canley 04:12, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


to user: canley, see how much one learns from this forum. thank-you for pointing out that fact. jaclyn

[edit] Teleportation and the interruption of consciousness?

I'm sure everyone's seen a sci-fi movie with teleporters, like Star Trek or The Fly. My question is, if the machine is just reading all the cells in your body, and "beaming it" somewhere else (presumably they're destroying the body and transmitting the 'plans' to another body-producing machine), wouldn't this technically kill you? I mean, there would be another person with your thoughts, memories, that was identical, but your brain would actually be destroyed and your consciousness interrupted, so wouldn't you be dead?

I'm uncertain of the concepts behind teleportation and how to phrase my question, but it's a very interesting issue.

Errrr, how should I put this...
Teletransportation does not exist!
Nevertheless, in a hipotetical scenario, it would make an interesting point. I suggest you take a look at Teleportation, specially the Teleportation scenarios section. Enjoy. Mariano(t/c) 14:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
The concept of teleportation was invented by Star Trek, because it was cheap! Just some twinkles and bam, you were on another sound stage. No spaceships to model, no expensive special effects. --Zeizmic 14:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
The concept of converting matter to energy to matter has been studied. You can read tons of boring papers or just get to the point: When matter is converted to energy, it loses any properties it has as matter. For example, when a nuclear bomb explodes, the energy released has nothing in it that signifies that it used to be an nuclear bomb. Also, it is my opinion that the papers that have studied teleportation tend to ignore the fact that the three dimensions we can can touch may not be the only dimensions we exist in. So, teleporting the matter that we can touch may be a small part of our overall existence. --Kainaw (talk) 15:43, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Not exactly true. Nukes have characteristics which can signify that the energy came from a bomb, and even what the type of manufacture of it was. But this is kind of picky.

There is the issue of transporting the "soul"...at least for those who believe souls are attached to our bodies. Some religious people might very well argue that you have actually murdered the real person and created a souless duplicate. I suspect the anti-stem cell research people would be the ones who would move to have the process banned.

Also, some method would be needed to "jump start" the new copy. That is, the heart beat and other body rythms which had been interrupted would need to be restarted. Your thoughts would certainly be interrupted, perhaps like the shocks in electroshock therapy.

Note that the technology for a very crude transporter exists already. An object can be scanned with a CAT scan or other device, this info can be sent anywhere, then a new object can be created via rapid prototyping methods. The materials are limited to the plastic from the SLA process or the "wood" from the LOM process, and the resolution and size are also limited, and the full process will take hours, but the basic idea is there. All that is needed now are some refinements (which may take a few hundred years) before we can transport people.

Also note that only transporting from one "transporter station" to another would be possible. The idea of transporting to a place without a station to assemble the molecules seems impossible to me. And sending the actual molecules or energy to the new site seems similarly absurd. Only the information need be sent, so that molecules and atoms at the new site can then be assembled into the final object. StuRat 19:55, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Of course, "sending the actual molecules to the new site" can be achieved using a simple truck, no teleporter required ;) Ojw 23:32, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Kainaw, you said "the three dimensions we can can touch may not be the only dimensions we exist in" and called this a "fact". This doesn't sound right to me. If it were a fact, there would be no doubt about it; but you're only saying it may be true, which leaves a lot of room for doubt. JackofOz 20:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I was stating the fact of an absense of a fact. I see the confusion. I wonder how often I do that. Regardless, the fact is not that there are more dimensions. The fact is that it is not a fact that there are only 3 dimensions of space. There may be only 3 dimensions of space, but that would only be a theory at this time. To my knowledge, there has been no proof that no other dimensions exist. --Kainaw (talk) 02:51, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


It's a fact that you've really confused me now. There's no proof that 69 dimensions don't exist - does this absence of proof mean that 69 dimensions must therefore necessarily exist? Of course not. I think you're starting by assuming that more than 3 physical dimensions exist and it's up to others to disprove this if they can. Isn't this the reverse of the way the scientific method works? Surely the burden of proof is on those who claim more than 3 physical dimensions. You have to prove this, you can't just assume it is so. Cheers JackofOz 08:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
No, he wasn't saying this means "69 dimensions must therefore necessarily exist" but rather that "some number of spatial dimensions higher than 3 could possibly exist". It's quite clear to me what he was saying. However, I disagree with the implied argument that "if more than 3 spatial dimensions exist, a transportation device would need to account for this to work". Conventional construction methods don't account for additional spatial dimensions, so neither would this be needed for a transporter. For example, if a carbon-12 atom has some presence in a 4th spatial dimension, then either each carbon-12 atom has an identical presence in the 4th dimension, or any differences don't matter to us in the three dimensional world. We know this, because a diamond or other object constructed of carbon-12 atoms is identical, regardless of which atoms we use. Therefore, if we use different carbon-12 atoms at a remote site to reconstruct a person, this difference in atoms will not matter to us in three dimensions. I suppose a philosophical exception could exist if you somehow believe the "soul" resides in this 4th dimension, linked to a set of three dimenional atoms. The argument that the soul will not be transported doesn't require resorting to higher dimensional models of the universe, however, and can stand on it's own. StuRat 10:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Also note that the technology to transport a retrovirus, some of which are basically just RNA, may exist in just a few years. We can scan DNA or RNA, transmit the info, and assemble DNA or RNA at the other end now. All that is needed is to increase the speed and accuracy to a point where an entire retrovirus can be produced reliably. Some consider a retrovirus to be alive, since they reproduce and evolved from more complex life forms. So, this will be quite a first step toward transporting living things. StuRat 20:37, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Boy, has this drifted away from science! I always thought if Star Trek had the perfect replicator, then why destroy the original? Wouldn't it be better to have thousands of Capt'n Kirks running around? or would they ask for too much pay? --Zeizmic 22:22, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
There's not enough alien ladies for so many! Back, sort of to the topic, I think an interesting question to ask is this: When you go to sleep, is it the same you that wakes up? After all, when you go to sleep, you consciousness gets interupted, and when you wake up you are effectively rebooted and reloaded from memories and so on. (I'm sure some people will disagree with the previous, but it seems to be a fairly common view.) If you accept that sleeping is fine, at least in this worldview, then there isn't anything in particular to worry about with teleportation - should it exist... I guess it ultimately depends on your idea on what consciousness is.
Also, obligatory SMAC quote:
"And what of the immortal soul in such transactions? Can this machine transmit and reattach it as well? Or is it lost forever, leaving a soulless body to wander the world in despair?" -- Sister Miriam Godwinson "We Must Dissent"
--Fangz 00:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

One type of transporter might scan an object, disassemble it, transmit its structure to a remote device, and the remote device construct a new version of the object from its own supply of raw materials. Of course, if the initial device didn't destroy the object after scanning it, you would end up with a copy of the object as mentioned above. In contrast, transporters on Star Trek do not only transmit information. The matter itself is beamed (the "matter stream") to the remote location. This, of course, is why people and objects can be beamed to locations without a transporter, like the surface of a planet; if only information is being transmitted, a receiving device with a supply of raw material must be present. It is also why transporting is limited to a short range around the transmitter; if only information were being transmitted, then presumably one could transmit the information from relay to relay to reconstruct someone many light years away. — Knowledge Seeker দ 01:00, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

If a "matter stream" were transmitted to some remote location, some device would still be needed to reassemble it. Star Trek neglected this fact as inconvenient. The difficulties in transporting matter and the fact that people are made from fairly common elements would make it rather pointless to send atoms through space rather than just using atoms at the target location.
A transporter that sends info could indeed transport people to locations light years away. However, under current physics theory, this info can go no faster than the speed of light, so the transportation would then take several years. Whether relays are needed would depend on the distance, broadcast signal strength, how narrowly the beam can be kept (perhaps a MASER beam ?), and the sensitivity of the receiver.
Making a copy without destroying the original would effectively be a "replicator", also from Star Trek, but apparently incapable of replicating life forms on that show.
StuRat 04:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Matter Transmission existed in science fiction "literature" long before Hollywood popularized it and hijacked the terminology, confusing the ethical concepts.

  • Make a copy, transmit a copy, keep the original ... you have a clone of sorts with identical fingerprints, biometrics, sharing the bank accounts, life mate ... various complications for law enforcement.
    • After confirming the copy arrived at destination, kill the original ... some legal complications there if the confirmation was flawed.
    • i remember one SF story where the "matter stream" data was "tapped" with an unauthorized copy made, for military intelligence purposes ... take prisoners without it being known that the prisoners were taken.
    • There was also a story where the unauthorized copies ended up inside some computer simulation where the prisoner had no free will to resist the interrogation.
    • This type of discussion has also occurred in other forums. I remember one where the info needed for replication was to be sent by e-mail, with the discussion identifying all the stuff that could go wrong, based on what can go wrong with our current technology e-mail.
  • Do not actually copy or kill the original, instead wrap space with a portal or some kind of connection that the people can "walk through." In many hollywood faster than light representations, some kind of worm hole is opened that connects space and time in two places, then the space ship just "walks through" the hole in space. Well perhaps, with suitable protective clothing, a human being could also "walk through."
  • Then there is teleportation in the psychic sense, where the same effect as the "hole in space" is used without having to know the details.
    • There are spiritual variations on this where the psychic mind vision consciousness travels to view some place else in an out of body event.

User:AlMac|(talk) 13:00, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Not to mention that quantum tunnelling could technically cause you to disappear from here and reappear there. The only problems are (1) doing this in a controlled fashion, rather than based on probability, and (2) making sure that all the particles in your body all tunnel to the same relative positions in the same energy configuration at the same time. If you can solve (1) then (2) should be a pushover :) Confusing Manifestation 14:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mental Disease of Regret

Does anyone know of a mental disease or disorder which causes a person to intensely regret things which have happened in their life? Particularly things they have done? Captain Jackson 19:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm no psychiatrist, but everyone regrets some things they've done. But if you mean regretting and worrying about things past to the degree that inhibits your ability to function, then it could perhaps be an Anxiety disorder. But there is no way of knowing this, because what you are describing is only one symptom. No mental disease or disorder can be diagnosed merely from a single symptom. --BluePlatypus 19:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
But as you say, BluePlatypus, you're no psychiatrist, so this is hardly an educated opinion. What is your authority for saying "No mental disease or disorder can be diagnosed merely from a single symptom"? JackofOz 20:11, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not appealing to authority. I don't need to, nor do I advocate it. If you are educated you can back up your statements with argument and fact. That is both more convincing and useful than any appeal to authority. Also, if you do have authority, you don't have to resort to it, because an authority should be able to argument for their position. That is what seperates science from pseudoscience and religion. As for the arguments in this case, it stands to simple reason: Different disorders can result in the same symptoms. The same disorder can result in very different symptoms. With many disorders, someone can exhibit a single or several symptoms without necessarily having the disorder. If a mental disease or disorder was so simple to diagnose then psychiatrists would hardly even need consulting a patient, or make their diagnosis after a single session. I have never heard of a psychiatrist making such a hasty conclusion. --BluePlatypus 20:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Well said. StuRat 21:06, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Having never heard of something, does not mean that something doesn't exist. Unless you've studied the field of mental diseases, psychiatry etc, you are simply in no position to know whether or not there are any examples of mental diseases or disorders that have a single symptom. I agree that, in general, there is no one-to-one correspondence between symptoms and diagnoses. But for all I know there could be isolated cases where that is true. I've never studied the subject so I would never presume to offer an opinion on that. I leave that to the experts. But I do know that it's not something that can be deduced from reason alone. JackofOz 23:02, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Even if there were cases a disorder had but a simple symptom, that doesn't mean that the diagnosis can be assumed from that single symptom. Your argument backs this up because there is just as likely a chance that another disorder could exist that isn't yet known which also exhibits only that one side effect. When you're talking about diagnosis there always has to be a certain degree of assumption involved, and that's the call that needs leaving to the psychiatrists. freshgavin TALK 05:00, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
The more absolute a claim is, the greater the scrutiny it deserves. BluePlatypus's original statement was nothing if not absolute. All I'm asking is for someone to demonstrate to me that there are no instances where a particular symptom means one and only one diagnosis. Does anybody know that for a fact? If so, show me the evidence. I'm not saying this statement is wrong, I just want to see proof. I'm just applying the same standard of verifiability to this statement as Wikipedia applies to all of us. JackofOz 06:02, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I understand what you're trying to say, but if you would think a little bit harder about what you're saying you would see that it can't logically exist. Lets assume the existence of a disease XY is believed. It was discovered when a patient with a very strange symptom GH was unable to get a proper diagnosis and thus they created the designation for XY on the belief that symptom GH was unique. Symptoms could be said to be static, in that no matter when or where you define a symptom, it, if properly defined can mean only one thing. (E.g. red eye doesn't mean black thumbnail and it never will). Diseases and the like are often not static at all, they mutate and change classifications, such that tomorrow a disease called XY-2 might be discovered, and logically you might assume that the symptoms would be similar. Said plainly symptoms could possibly be contained within a finite set, whereas diseases can't be. Yes this is a point in semantics but thinking this way means your statement is slightly less true than the original (you can always assume that there may be another diagnosis even though it is known to exist yet. This is a rewording of your argument.) freshgavin TALK 06:42, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. I've read your response about 6 times now and still find myself a bit baffled by it, I must admit.

  • What can't logically exist?

The proof that you're asking for.

If something is inherently unprovable, anybody is entitled to draw attention to that fact. Otherwise, some people will read it and presume it's the gospel truth because it came from Wikipedia reference desk.
  • You talk about symptoms that, if properly defined, can mean only one thing. And then give an example of a symptom (red eye) that does not mean something else (black thumb nail). The example was not a demonstration of the principle you were explaining, so I'm not sure what you're actually saying here

It was just an example to contrast with diagnosis. Red eye means red eye, not 'red eye v2', or 'suspected red eye', etc.

OK. Then there's no need to introduce irrelevancies like black thumb nail. They just confuse and water down your argument.
  • "symptoms could possibly be contained within a finite set, whereas diseases can't be" - I confess I have no real idea what this means

Simply that symptoms relative to diagnoses can be easily defined and classified (note: relative) whereas diseases, even when understood take on unpredictable characteristics.

This is not all that much clearer - to me.
  • "your statement is slightly less true than the original" - what statement? I've made no statements or claims that require testing. All I've done is ask that BluePlatypus's claim be verified.

the original statement was "No mental disease or disorder can be diagnosed merely from a single symptom". Your statement was "You are in no position to know ... if there are examples of mental diseases or disorders that have a single symptom". I'm sure what you meant to say here was "if it is possible to deduce diseases or disorders from a single symptom or not".

And I'm sure I meant exactly, precisely what I said. Blue Platypus told us he was "no psychiatrist". Absolute statements even from experts are always challengeable; how much more challengeable are absolute statements from persons who, by their own admission, are not experts in the field.
  • "This is a rewording of your argument" - what argument? The only argument I've made is that absolute claims should be subject to scrutiny. How is what you said a rewording of that? JackofOz 11:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

You have made many arguments, in fact I'm losing track. The basic structure of your argument is that it's impossible to deduce A from B when you lack the knowledge to do so, and I'm saying that equally it's impossible to assume that such a one to one correspondence is even POSSIBLE to exist because of the same reason. In fact, I'm not even sure that your argument even EXISTS, or that I'm even argueing about this argument ... ahhh I'm lost in paradoxes. freshgavin TALK 00:43, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

You changed your argument. First you questioned my authority to make the statement, then you questioned the "absoluteness" of the statement I made. That's inconsistent, because your critique of making an 'absolute' statement is equally applicable to whether it's made by an authority or not. The statement isn't verifiable, however it is falsifiable by counterexample. Not that that matters because you're overinterpreting the statement to make some kind of point. The point of that statement was not to make a dogmatic decree on the nature of all mental illnesses past and present, but to provide the common-sense advice that one should err on the side of caution when diagnosing mental disorders. You are using a Strawman argument, by misrepresenting what I said as an unreasonably absolute statement. --BluePlatypus 15:42, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. StuRat 16:58, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, no, I didn't change my argument. All I did was restate my requirement for proof in a different way, because my original form of words didn't produce a response that answered the question I was asking. I used the word "authority" in a general sense. (Eg. If you claim "apple" means "orange", I can ask for your "authority" to make such a statement, and if you can produce a dictionary that shows this is a valid meaning, I would be content. I would not require you to engage the services of linguist, grammarian or lexicographer.) You produced no evidence to back up your statement, so I asked further questions.
But even if I had changed my argument (which I didn't), what would have been so wrong with that? If I disagree with something, I'm entitled to challenge it using my entire arsenal of weaponry. If your statement has merit, it will withstand any and all queries.
But that's all water under the bridge now, because you agree that the statement is falsifiable, so I take that as acknowledgment that it would have been wiser never to have made it in the first place.
I never claimed it was an "unreasonably" absolute statement.
I absolutely agree with you that "one should err on the side of caution when diagnosing mental disorders". Perhaps if you had said what you meant right away, we could have avoided this exchange (although I enjoy these debates, I must say, they are very stimulating. If nobody ever took exception to anything anybody ever said, it would be a pretty boring place).
As for the Strawman thing, you're entitled to have that opinion, but that was not where I was coming from (and I think you know better about me by now, BluePlatypus).
Happy Australia Day to all Aussies and everyone else. JackofOz 01:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Since when did "apple" not mean "orange"? freshgavin TALK 06:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm .. interesting question. I guess, as Alice in Wonderland said, words can mean whatever you want them to mean. JackofOz 22:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I would say Post Traumatic Stress Disorder might qualify.
See Major depression. Feelings of guilt can be a feature of clinical depression. Cybergoth 22:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
One instance of a mental disorder with only one symptom ? what about calling names like empire of evil a free country ? Alas, there are other symptoms. --DLL 18:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Harvestman, were you replying to my note? I was merely trying to answer the original question. Cybergoth 01:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I must admit that Harvestman never seems to make any sense to me either. freshgavin TALK 03:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suntan through glass windows?

Can you get a suntan through glass windows? Why or why not?

Yes, but not as quickly. Suntan is caused by UV light. While an ordinary glass window will filter out some of the UV, it won't filter out all of it. So it's basically like sunscreen. --BluePlatypus 19:58, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Some kinds of glass is largly transparent to UV.

[edit] How do whales know where they are going?

Hello. My mother teaches a second grade class and has told her students that they may write down any question that they'd like and put it in her 'mailbox' for her to answer. She has been able to answer all but one of said questions. This question is: "How do whales know where they are going and how do they protect themselves from predators?" I don't really know the answer either so.. please help and, if possible, answer as if you would to a second grade student. Thank you. --Sarah E. Moxley

They nagivate using a form of echo location, like sonar. As for predators, humans whaling are probably one of their biggest concerns. You can find lots more information in the whale article --Noodhoog 20:50, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
In addition to echo location, they also know where they are by the temperature, saltiness, taste, and currents in the water.
As far as protecting themselves, the adults are generally large enough so nothing messes with them. The adults protect the calves by positioning themselves between the calves and any predators. Some smaller whales, like pilot whales, are small enough to be attacked by sharks. They just have to avoid them. The one thing whales can't protect themselves from is people. Whalers, water pollution, and noise pollution in the form of undersea explosions and SONAR may drive whales to extinction. StuRat 20:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
How do you know they know where they are going? GangofOne 01:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Because they undergo regular migrations, and seem to make it back to the same place year after year. StuRat 04:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
It seems like I remember hearing something about them also having some sort of magnetic navigation that helps them with migration and things of that nature. Also, if I remember correctly, sometimes when there are solar flares etc., their navigation gets screwed up and sometimes they get lost. I'm not sure how true this is, but take it as you will. I skimmed through the whale article but didn't see anything of this nature. Dimblethum 04:58, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Plant diseases

Are 'verticillium wilt' and 'verticulum wilt' the same disease? If not, are they very similar? ike9898 20:33, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

My guess would be that the latter is a spelling error. Guettarda 21:06, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Not sure about that...'verticulum' gets ~245 a few Google hits; if the name variation is just a misspelling, it has apparently propagated. ike9898 22:13, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
For some of the hits, the html keywords and the contents say verticillium. Maybe a corruption from diverticulum (397,000 hits), same latin root : vertex (summit) ? --DLL 18:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ac radio controlled power on/off device

I need a type of device that can turn a device plugged into it on and off by radio signal (or some other remote signal). I've heard of devices that can be pre-programmed to turn things on and off, but this won't work for me as I need to be able to turn something on and off at different times every day remotely.

Does anyone know of anything that can do this? Flea110 22:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

"Clap on! Clap off!" See The Clapper. Cybergoth 22:51, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I thought of that, but I need a way to covertly switch it. Clapping is much too noticable. 142.179.55.215 23:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
May we ask what you want to turn on covertly ? (I hope it's not a bomb.) StuRat 04:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Who on Earth would create a bomb that needs a socket nearby? :P ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 05:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
A bomb inside a building could work that way. Disguising it as an innocent looking appliance, like a TV, might be effective. StuRat 05:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
But a bomb that needs to be plugged? It just sounds ridiculous :P ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 13:54, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
The idea is that the plug is part of the disguise. You could also make it capable of running on batteries. The plug could also allow an electrical spike to be introduced into the wires to cause an electrical fire in the walls, or, at the very least, cause circuit breakers or fuses to blow. StuRat 16:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I want to be able to covertly turn on and off the modem connected to the people who live upstairs computer so that at night (or whenever their computer is not in use) I can use a different (but identical) modem with a different phone jack so I can use their internet on my computer. 142.179.55.215 22:11, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm relieved that it's not for a bomb, but it's still unethical and quite possibly illegal to do what you want, so I advise against it. Also, if they catch you they may be furious. It hardly seems worth the risk. Why not ask them about sharing their internet connection ? They may ask you to pay half, but at least you will be honest about it. StuRat 05:11, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I didn't want to have to admit this (because it sounds childish sort of) but "the people who live upstairs" are my parents. They are strictly against me using the internet on my own computer. Don't ask me why, as in my opinion they've presented no reasonable reasons. I've tried endless negotiations with them, but to no avail. True, if they catch me they would be furious, but I can see no other reasonable alternatives. It's not a matter of payment at all, it's just that, in their opinion, me+internet on my own computer=bad news.
You need to decide which is more important, having Internet access on your computer or gaining your parents' trust and respect. This type of action, if discovered, will seriously damage the trust and respect you should be trying to foster. Since you obviously have Internet access to be posting here, I am guessing they allow you to access the Internet on their computer. This is standard advice given to parents: "allow kids to use the Internet, but only with supervision, to be sure they don't get into trouble online". I know it's hard to accept, but they are just doing what they think is best for you. StuRat 08:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps this isn't the best place to carry on a discussion of this sort. See your talk page. Flea110 23:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Have you looked into X10 automation? Many systems offer manual remote control.Night Gyr 23:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
The issue is "radio controlled". Radio controlled devices are highly untrustworthy. Just about any cell phone, microwave, passing airplane, or errant television signal can set them off. If you can accept that, it isn't much of a device. Any hobby shop has tons of radio controlled on/off switches (like a servo, but it is either on or off, not a swinging arm). Connect that to the control of a relay and it will turn the relay on and off. You'd want one that is commonly used to turn AC/Heater systems on/off. Those relays easily handle standard AC load. --Kainaw (talk) 23:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC)\
He wants a device he can plug in and use, not something he has to jury rig himself. X-10 provides exactly what he wants. Also, your fears of setting off radio controls are rather unfounded. The FCC keeps the frequencies reasonably well regulated, at least as far as noninterference goes. I don't see garage doors opening every time a plane takes off. I've never seen a single report of X-10 devices being turned on or off by outside interference. Night Gyr 23:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


I have seen many interference problems. But then, I have always lived near the biggest RF polluter that I know of - airports. It was worst when I was in the Marines living on an air station. There was so much pollution that our speakers would emit strange buzzing noises all day even if they were not plugged into anything. As for garage doors - funny you should mention that. As a stupid teen, my friend and I would drive through neighborhoods with an RF emitter and open garage doors one after the other. I know they are better now, but back then they would open for just about any signal. --Kainaw (talk) 02:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Here's a few X10 devices that take RF control: [93] You may want to shop around for lower prices, but you're only looking at around $20 for a simple remote plugin switch. Night Gyr 00:00, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I will definitely be looking into this. Thanks. Flea110 02:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Many terrorists have used bombs attached to cellular phones. So long as the batteries in the phone hold out, telephoning the cell phone, it rings, the ringer is attached to the boom.
  • Some security services use devices activated by voice or motion detection, so that they are only capturing information, when there is information to be captured.
  • In the business computer world, we can send messages to dummy addresses that are being monitored by software. No message, no action. Message arrives, and the software processes it. The message can be quite simple, containing some text strings that are like commands to the monitoring software to tell it what to do.

User:AlMac|(talk) 13:15, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Years ago I bought a device on sale from Radio Shack which did this. I had a light in the garage where the switch was

located in an incovenient place so I hooked this up to it and hung the on-off switch next to the door. The switch needed a standard 9v battery and had a simple on button and an off button.

Garage door openers are pretty popular ... motorist enters driveway & clicks the thing ... it can also be hooked to the house lites so you not have to get out of your car at nite to find the light switch. Many people have clutter in their garages that are easily tripped over. User:AlMac|(talk) 04:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 25

[edit] Sex-linked diseases

Why aren't there sex-linked diseases that are carried on the Y chromosome (or are there)?

I think this is a plot by the female gender. (CABAL!) — Ilyanep (Talk)]] 01:31, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Because there is little essential information carried on the Y chromosome. Every human has an X, but 50% of the human race lacks a Y, so it has to be dispensable. The only significant Y linked disease is the absence or nonfunction of SRY, which leads to sex reversal (XY genotype, female phenotype). It's a genetically "dead-end" condition because they are usually not fertile. alteripse 01:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


Also, I'm fairly cetain that there are some, though not many. The reason for this is twofold. One, any major life-threatening diseases can only be transferred directly from father to son. Another is that there are no carriers. Females aren't affected by sex-linked diseases as much because most of those diseases are found on the X chromosone. Since they have two X chroms, unless both chroms are affected, the unaffected X chrom just takes over. In this way, they have a chance of being unnafected but passing on a defected X. An affected Male Y chromosone doesn't have another Y who can take over. --Herzog 01:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Note that this is only true of recessive diseases carried on the X chromosome. StuRat 04:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Several types of azoospermia are linked to mutations in genes on the Y chromosome. But because these conditions decrease fertility, there is a strong evolutionary bias against them. --WS 13:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC) The Sex linkage article comes close to defining sex-linked disease genes as being on the X chromosome. Some genetics texts seem reluctant to describe Y-linked defects as sex-linked disease (example). Some people say, "All sex-linked disorders are X-linked" (example). --JWSchmidt 02:15, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

The way we were given sex-linked diseases was basically a disease that is carried on the X chromosome. — Ilyanep (Talk) 03:01, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
There are unique genes on the Y chromosome. I believe that mutations on these genes might cause certain diseases, such as azoospermia and male infertility. See also genetic disease and y-linked disease. See here for a list of genes on the Y chromosome. Cybergoth 04:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the list. I added them to Y chromosome. alteripse 11:21, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flashlights that you shake

I keep seeing these ads for flashlights that you shake to light up, that supposedly don't need any batteries. How do they work, and how long does the light last after each shaking? User:Zoe|(talk) 03:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the most important part is that they use a much higher efficiency light than a conventional flashlight's incandescent bulb. This allows the small amount of energy from shaking to last longer. StuRat 04:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
They use LEDs. I don't have a "shaky" flashlight, but I do have one that you "wind up". After about 30 seconds of winding, it provides 3-5 minutes of useful light. (I'm always amazed that it actually works, so the short duration isn't too bad). I'd be surprised if the "shaky" light lasted any longer than that. - Nunh-huh 04:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
The shaky flashlights contain a mobile magnet and a wire coil that runs along the length of the interior of the flashlight. When you shake the flashlight, the magnet moves up and down along the coil, inducing an electric current in the coil. This current is stored by the flashlight in a capacitor–for short-term, low energy storage, capacitors are more efficient than batteries)–and used to operate a high-efficiency LED. Some companies report sufficient storage capacity to remain lit for up to 60 minutes without additional shaking. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 04:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Is it just me or does anyone else find it amusing that a bunch of people who are, presumably, adults are referring to something as a "shaky flashlight"? I don't know... Just reminds me of the Monty Python bit that discusses the parts of the body including the "naughty bits". Dismas|(talk) 10:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I've seen and used those flashlights, and their appearance is just as suggestive as you allude to above. Some friends of mine coined the term "wanklight" for them. (This is getting more appropriate for Urbandictionary than Wikipedia, though, but since we're technically in projectspace I suppose it's okay to get sidetracked into "Ehehehehe, that thing looks like a... penis!" occasionally. Let's try not to make a habit of it, though.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 11:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Fleshlight comes to mind.... ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 11:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
One of my friends owns one and brought it on a recent camping trip; we all agreed that 'charging the flashlight' would be an excellent euphemism. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:01, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Sounds pretty impractical to me. Doesn't the light bounce all over the place when you shake the torch (I mean, when you start using it and the battery is still empty)? A Dyno torch seems to make more sense. And they've been around for at least half a century, so what might this new invention have to offer? The article mentions it and says it uses a 'solenoid'. It also says these new things are less reliable, so I'll stick to the torch I have. Which, by the way, is exactly the same one as the one in the photograph. And a bit of trivia: the Dutch word is 'knijpkat', meaning 'squeeze cat'. Apparently, the dynamo used to make a sound reminiscent of a 'squeezed cat' (or so the Dutch article claims). Luckily that is no longer the case. :) DirkvdM 14:16, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Come to think of it, this might be practical for travelling. Both models have the advantage that one is not dependent on an electricity source. But the shaken version will load itself in a backpack by being bounced up and down (and sideways occasionally :) ). But then wouldn't something that loads recharchable batteries (which can also be used for all sorts of other things) make more sense? DirkvdM 14:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and that makes me think of watches that charge themselves through a rotating motion. Simply wearing them (and moving your arm often enough) charged them. Haven't seen any of those for some time though, which makes sense in this age of 'digital watches'. DirkvdM 14:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Isn't it based on Faraday's law of induction concerning induction of charge by a ferromagnetic object moving against a coil? These are neat little devices, but the capacitors seem quite limited and only hold a charge to run a LED for a brief period. I was rather disappointed in the actual light output of these devices, its quite minimal. IMHO, unless you have the need for a truly free energy source thats going to last a very very long time, you are a lot better off just getting a LED based lithium-ion battery powered light. They will shine for a *really* long time, plus they are very bright and compact. I found an 8-led light that takes 3 AAAs, its rated to shine for 100+ hours on a set of batteries, it is blinding bright, and about 1" dia. x 4" long, very small for a flashlight. --66.195.232.121 19:00, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
The issue I have with conventional flashlights is that I may only use them once every 10 years, when I have a long power failure, at which time the batteries are invariably dead from age. Any alternative to battery powered flashlights can solve this problem. Of course, I could always periodically go around and check all my battery charges, but that would take away from my ranting time here. StuRat 19:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I have a similar problem, after about 10 years I can be assured that the entire flashlight is gone. I don't think ive posessed any one thing for longer than 4-5 years, and thats when its something hard to lose. Flashlights are usually out of my posession before they are ready for new batteries. If someone could invent the self-retaining flashlight thats resistant to 'forgetful borrowing roomates' and 'disappears when placed in a large box marked MOVING' that would be of *great* use to me.
I think you need to "borrow" your roommates' girlfriends, at least until they stop borrowing your stuff. StuRat 12:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Do your roommates 'borrow' your lightbulbs as well? If not, then you might hang the torch from the ceiling, pretending to be a lightbulb. This way it's also easier to locate when you need it. DirkvdM 10:42, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for all the answers, folks. User:Zoe|(talk) 17:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity

In the equation, hf = mc^2, what is the underlying principle? How can mc^2, associated with a stationary mass, be linked with hf which has a certain frequency? Does that mean that even a stationary mass also have a certain oscillation within them, thus providing them with a certain energy hf?

E = hf represents the energy E of a photon of frequency f (h being Planck's constant). E = mc² represents the rest energy E of a certain amount m of mass (c being the speed of light on vacuum). While they're both energy, I don't think you can equal both because they're about two different concepts: photon energy and rest mass energy. I don't recall seeing the equation "hf = mc²" before either, so I may be utterly wrong. But.... On a second thought, with mass being the same thing as energy (E=mc²), and a photon having energy (E=hf), you could understand that a photon would suffer the effects from gravity the same way ordinary mass does, which is true... Would that be correct? :P ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 07:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
E = mc2 doesn't apply to photons, because they have no rest frame. However, E=\sqrt{p^2c^2+m^2c^4} applies to everything, giving E = pc = \frac{hc}{\lambda} = hf for photons (and E = mc2 for stationary particles with mass). See De Broglie wavelength for why p = \frac{h}{\lambda} (h being Planck's constant), and for discussion of how to assign a sensible frequency/wavelength to particles with mass. As far as I know, there is no intuitive way to relate any of this to General Relativity--it's much easier just to think of all particles as following the curvature of spacetime. -- SCZenz 16:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
See my note above, and the De Broglie wavelength article. Since \lambda = \frac{h}{p}, a motionless massive particle really wouldn't have a wavelength. That likely explains why we've never seen hf = mc2. -- SCZenz 16:11, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

The equation could be used to calculate the frequency of a photon emitted in a matter-antimatter decay. Be careful about the number of particles though. -lethe talk 18:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I seem to recall the equation mc2 = hf originated in the 1965 movie Alphaville, where some pseudo-scientific calculations are interspersed with the movie, resulting in the above equation -- Ferkelparade π 11:41, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About the hydraulic model of inductors

From the article inductor:

"As electrical current can be modeled by fluid flow, much like water through pipes; the inductor can be modeled by the flywheel effect of a turbine rotated by the flow. As can be demonstrated intuitively and mathematically, this mimics the behavior of an electrical inductor; current is the integral of voltage, in cases of a sudden interruption of flow it will generate a high pressure across the blockage, etc. Magnetic interactions such as transformers, however, are not modeled."

My question is quick: would the energy stored on the magnetic field of the inductor be then akin to the angular momentum stored on the flywheel?

If so, then why cannot we model magnetic coupling? Wouldn't that be akin to the coupling of two flywheels through the use of gears? I suppose you could model the magnetic induction on a secondary through the transmitted torque on the gears.

Just a thought... ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 07:05, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, at a first glance, the coupling thing does look like a really good equivalance. deeptrivia (talk) 13:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

BTW, it's spelled hydraulic. StuRat 16:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

D'oh ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 00:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hight Def Video and Interlaced format.

What is the technological reason for using any interlaced video format with HDTV? As far as I understand the interlacing technique was invented to get around the fluorescent's short persistence phenomenon, in order to reduce flickering on Cathode Ray Tube displays (CRTs). With the invention of the plasma screens and since HDTV targets mostly those screens, this technique seems to be obsolete and not necessary anymore (plasma screens do not suffer from the short persistence like CRTs). I expected any new format to abandon the interlacing technology completely and concentrate on compression using the modern technology (Spatial / Temporal redundancy reduction using Motion Compensation and DCT). Transmitting 60 fields per second or 30 full frames per second consumes the same bandwidth however if the video is interlaced the receiver must de-interlace it, which consumes serious amount of CPU power and result in inferior quality.

Why we are still using interlaced video for HDTV???

Hkl8324 08:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Good question. I'm not actually sure, but one thought is in dealing with missing chunks of a picture due to interference. Having a large black chunk in the middle of the screen during a frame would be far more obvious than two "half-black" chunks. Also, this would provide the receiver the potential to reconstruct the missing pixels by averaging the pixels above and below, which should make the missing data completely undetectable to the veiwer at normal speed and difficult to detect even in a freeze frame. I don't know if any receivers currently have this ability, but interlacing at least makes it possible. Without interlaced images, the next best thing would be to average the previous and subsequent frames. This would have the disadvantages of requiring 3 frames be stored in memory rather than one, requiring a delay of one frame before each frame is displayed, and would also do a poor job of filling in a quickly moving object in the missing field. Again, I don't know that this is the reason, it's just a guess. StuRat 10:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Bandwidth is the main reason. It takes roughly half as much spectrum to send an interlaced signal as a progressive scan signal. That means that the other half of the spectrum can be used by the television channel/cable operator/satteltie service to send a second channel. Two channels equals two sets of advertisements and/or extra charges to the subscribing user. Johntex\talk 20:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EYE

Is the power of eye sight at any stage constant; means I am now 24 and using glasses of power -1.75 for right eye and -1.25 for left eye, Is it chages frequently or it may constant for long time in constant use.

waiting for valuable suggesstion, thankx

It can change over time. Typically glasses will last several years, but you should be retested regularly. As well as getting weaker or stronger, other things change with age (often in the 40-50 age group) such as difficulty focussing on closer objects when wearing glasses that are needed for far objects; this leads to glasses with multiple prescriptions. Notinasnaid 10:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
You should go back and get retested at least every two years or so (yearly until about the age of 18). Your prescription isn't especially high, and so I wouldn't imagine it would change very rapidly. Wikipedia does not dispense medical advice, however, and so for correct advice, please consult your opthamologist/optician/optometrist. You will find that your vision will get better in the short distances as you get older (40 or 50 as Notinasnaid said), but your long-distance vision will weaken. See eyeglass prescription, myopia and hyperopia for more information. Proto t c 12:19, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] arterioschlorosis

Does the onset or acuteness of arterioschlorosis have anything to do with long-term consumption of hard water?

Dudley Warrington

You had me 'suitly emphazi'd' for a while until I realized its atherosclerosis, which is gunking up of the arteries. This comes more from eating junk food than anything else. --Zeizmic 15:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
+10 points for using "the words". ;) --Sum0 15:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Hard water could possibly clog water pipes, but not "your pipes", AKA veins and arteries. Trans-fatty acids, like partially hydrogenated soybean oil, is the main culprit there, and should be avoided entirely. StuRat 16:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

There have been several laboratory and epidemiologic studies that have correlated the long-term consumtion of hard water with a decreased risk of cardiovascular disease. This is mostly considered a result of the physiologic effects of dissolved calcium and magnesium in hard water. There is also some ambiguity in the use of the terms "hard" and "soft", since they mostly refer to the reduced detergency of surfactants in water rather than a specific set of dissolved minerals. Therefore, "soft" water need not simply have a low concentration of known hardeners such as calcium, but may have elevated levels of substances such as lead or cadmium, which are quite toxic. See (Removed for archiving due to spam filter)

--Mark Bornfeld DDS 16:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Softened water is also frequently high in sodium, which can cause high blood pressure, which in turn damages blood vessel walls and provides sites for the formation of atherosclerosis. However, the amound of sodium is usually less than that consumed in the typical unhealthy diet. StuRat 19:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] singularity????where from

i one of the q&a i read about singularity. But where did this matter come from?????(big bang theory)

If you're referring to the "singularity" from which all matter came at the start of the universe, I'd caution that we don't know what happened in the first tiny fraction of a second of the universe's existence, and we probably never will. The moment of the Big Bang was the appearence of the universe, space, and time—not just matter—and I it's not even clear that science can answer the question of where the universe itself came from.
Of course, there are also run-of-the-mill singularities, i.e. Black holes. -- SCZenz 16:15, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
LOL @ "run of the mill black holes" ... I have a few dozen in my closet right now. StuRat 16:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
They're easy to make, if you happen to have a star of a couple solar masses with a nearly all-iron core lying around. -- SCZenz 16:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I always keep several solar masses of matter handy in case I need to create a black hole Ad Hoc. In fact I have an interesting story about the time I accidently...

[edit] Unusual frog

I'm looking for the name of a frog (or possibly a toad) I saw on a nature show. It had a distinctive leaf-shaped body, and the female had a section of sponge-like skin on her back where she kept the tadpoles until they matured. The skin had large pores in it where the tadpoles could swim in and out. I'm not having any luck finding its name by searching for the characteristics. TheSPY 14:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Was it one of the malaysian frogs on this page? David Sneek 15:54, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Surinam Toad? Femto 19:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Many thanks! TheSPY 20:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PC to MAC file conversions

I currently own a Dell laptop running Windows XP. I have saved pictures, music (iTunes and Media Player) and documents etc... What is involved and how difficult/frustrating/time consuming would it be if i bought an Apple computer and wanted to transfer everything to that. Thank you, Dan l'homme

JPGs, BMPs, GIFs, MP3s, plain text files and PDFs can be viewed/heard with the software that comes with Mac OS X. I imagine your problems will be more an issue of finding appropriate software than with converting files (example, Windows Media player for mac for WMVs). Frencheigh 15:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't have any personal experience with this, but I would imagine that DRM-protected music files in iTunes might also cause you some problems. As for documents, proprietary formats will be difficult to transfer if there is no compatible program for the Mac. — QuantumEleven | (talk) 16:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
There is no "etc" in this sort of task. You need to look at every type of file involved, sadly. Notinasnaid 19:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Something Cernen's familiar with. (And, being Cernen, I can answer your question, even though I'm too addicted to Wikipedia for my own good). If you want to convert WMAs for use on a mac, you can't do it on the mac. I've tried. You have to do it from Windows using iTunes and then take the newly created stuffs from your Windows PC to your Mac. The DRM-protected music in iTunes (m4ps) won't cause you any trouble at all if you register your new iMac with your iTunes Music Store account (a very easy task). If, however, you have stuff you bought from the RealNetworks music store, you can either kiss it goodbye or go through the long arduous process of burning it to a CD, then ripping the CD on your Mac. (A royal pain in the arse.) To transfer files, I took my hard drive out of my old computer and put it in a portable enclosure; you can find those just about anywhere for about forty bucks. I plugged the enclosure into my Mac and took the files off of it that way. (Keep in mind, however, that while reading from Windows XP hard drives is a piece of cake for a Mac, writing to them can be deadly and you should not do that at all.) 12.72.244.198 12:12, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


What would the Move2Mac software allow me to transfer?

What would be missing? Thanks, Dan l'homme

My recommendation is NOT to use Detto Move2Mac. From all the reviews posted at the Apple Store by people who have used the product, it is generally hated. I don't know what it would or wouldn't allow you to transfer, but you could check their website for more information. 12.72.244.198 12:32, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


Thank you for all your advice. You'd like to think there'd be a simple answer. Dan l'homme

[edit] Do wind turbines causea magnetic fields?

(no question posted)

They can if that is what they are designed to do. See wind turbine. --Kainaw (talk) 19:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Ampère's law suggests that the wires from all electrical generators (not just wind turbines) will generate a magnetic field. Plus generators are built from magnets - it all depends what strength field you were hoping to find. Ojw 23:52, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] muscle is less heavy than the fat

Is it true that the muscle is less heavy than the fat ?

I've always heard that muscle is heaver than fat. Dimblethum 23:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
It seems muscles are 22% more dense that fat, thus 1 cubic centimetre of muscle is heavier than 1 cubic centimetre of fat. - Akamad 23:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
That's correct. This leads to the odd fact that when starting an exercise program, a person may lose inches off their waist, and yet gain weight, as the fat is transformed into muscle. StuRat 02:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
'transformed' may not be the right word, though it leaves one with a useful mental image. -- Ec5618 10:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reheating spinach

I've heard that reheating spinach makes it toxic. The spinach article says nothing about it and a question at the talk page hasn't gotten a conclusive answer. Anyone here know? The reason I ask is that I regularly eat (frozen) spinach, to which I add milk, feta and lemon juice, which requires reheating. If there is any truth in the story, does it apply to this or only to serious cooling (eg in the fridge to eat the next day)? Oh, and to complete the recipe, I also add curry powder (a fair bit of the stuff), an egg and an onion, mash that with boiled potatoes and eat it with black pudding. Absolutely delicious! DirkvdM 20:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, you crazy old guy, you made me use some of my very suitly emphazi time. Spinach contains oxalic acid, which has some nasty properties. However, when washed down with large quantities of good Dutch beer, it is quite safe to eat, reheated or otherwise. --Zeizmic 21:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I've never understood why people cook spinach. Raw it is much better for you and better tasting than lettuce. When cooked, however, it acquires the texture of snot. StuRat 02:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Though spinach/potato soup is pretty good. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 05:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
And don't forget to try it with curry (or curry powder). Actually, the packaging states that the spinbach has merely been briefly blanched and I don't cook it, just heat it. I now notice that the quantity I eat in one day contains just over the daily recommended dose of vitamin A (1 mg), so I suppose I should be a bit careful with that since that can be bad for the liver (although it's still 1/3 of what the article states as the upper limit). Oh, and I now remember once hearing that adding an egg counteracts the alledged negative effects of spinach. Another old wives tale? DirkvdM 11:04, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
No reason to worry about Vitamin A toxicity. Spinach is a plant, and as such contains carotenoids, which are cleaved by the body to yield Vitamin A proper. Just check out the structural formulas. 82.26.171.28 04:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Spinach salad is good. Make a dressing of hot bacon grease and chopped bacon bits with vinegar and pour it over the leaves, they slightly wilt. Excellent salad. :) User:Zoe|(talk) 17:11, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, yes, bacon! I used to put bacon in it, but I ate bacon in half my meals and I didn't want to leave it out of the chili (chili con bacon :) ), so I left it out of the spinach. Oddly, that's how I came up with the currypowderm looking for an alternative flavouring. Two fine examples of how I think I came up with something original, only to find out others have thought of that too. DirkvdM 10:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
While I am a big raw spinach fan and never eat iceberg "lettuce" if I can avoid it, I became a big fan of cooked spinach for the first time in the form of palak paneer sometimes called saag, though the picture in that is different from how I have usually had it. DirkvdM, you should try that as it's kind of like what you make. I've certainly never heard anything about reheating it being dangerous. Where did you hear that? And it seems our [[spinach article could use some verifying. The nutrition bit seems a bit off, but I have no reason to know for sure. - Taxman Talk

[edit] Book needed

Greetings:

Does any one know where I can find a electronic copy of the following book? :

Software Testing: A Craftsman's Approach, Second Edition
2nd edition,
Paul C. Jorgensen,
CRC Press

I need it desperately for my upcoming software engineering class midterm.

Regards,

129.97.252.63 21:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I will not make fun of people who ask for illegal things... I will not make fun of people who ask for illegal things..... --Zeizmic 22:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
What makes you think it's illegal?...What makes you think it's illegal?... DirkvdM 11:09, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
  1. Get a digital camera.
  2. Break into the school bookstore.
  3. Locate the book and photo all the pages with your camera.
  4. When you are sitting in the jail cell later, if they let you have access to your camera, you can then study the electronic copy in there.

User:AlMac|(talk) 04:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the point is that most recent books are not available electronically, precisely because of the fear that they will be illegally copied and deny the authors their royalties. There are exceptions, however. I don't know if this book is an exception or not. StuRat 12:51, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Normally, you have to wait about 70 years minimum for a book to released into the public domain. Once this is done, it can then (yes, the entire book!) be seen electronically. KILO-LIMA 22:34, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Indestructible penguins

I've heard that penguins resist extreme low temperatures because they have an ultra-dense layer of fat under their skin. Could you acknowledge this? --GTubio 22:11, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Nothing that is ultra-dense would make a good insulation. However, the outer feathers mat to a dense layer to keep out the water. Then they have a fluffy layer of down, and a layer of standard blubber. Our article penguin does not go too much into the physics of the insulation. I found that from other sources. --Zeizmic 22:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
How ultra-dense layers of fat would characterize anything as indestructible? (Blob!?) ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 05:06, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Apparently that was meant as a humorous exaggeration. StuRat 12:46, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Fat is lighter than water, so it can't be particularily dense in comparison with the rest of an animal. --BluePlatypus 16:18, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you all. And... yes, it was an easy joke (although some people didn't even get it) to attract people in a manner "what the heck is this section going to be about?". --GTubio 17:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I figured it was just a stupid attempt at an addition to Exploding animals, which is so Wiki2005. freshgavin TALK 03:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Characteristics of human eyesight

Is it possible to express human eyesight characteristics as measures of resolution, contrast ratio, etc...? For example, does it make sense to say something like "human eyes see in 2000x3000 resolution, with a 10000:1 contrast ration"? If so, what do humans see in? Flea110 23:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Somebody asked that question a few days ago and it was answered here. freshgavin TALK 00:03, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
When I click on the link, it merely takes me to the main science page. Is the problem with me or with the link? Flea110 00:12, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
The link was wrong. He wanted to direct you to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science#eye_compared_to_a_camera. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 00:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Unless you edited it, the link was right. You have to wait for the entire page to load before the focus shifts to the anchor. [sp?] freshgavin TALK 00:51, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I edited it. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 01:43, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, right. I see my mistake now. m(_ _)m freshgavin TALK 04:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 26

[edit] Specific question help.

Before people start shouting "NO HOMEWORK" at me, I'm aware it's against the rules - but I figure I've nothing to lose by trying :)

The lab this week was reducing benzil to form a diastereoisomeric diol, then determining which form you got (RR, RS, SS.) I've solved all the subsequent problems to do with the formation of a cyclic ketal, and I'm certain that the product I got was meso-, but I can't figure out why it was. I'm guessing there has to be some sort of steric factor, but that alone isn't going to cut it in a write-up, and playing around with my models, I can't see why only the meso-form is produced from the reduction. Any hints from the amazing Wiki-mind? 81.132.176.76 01:18, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Usually there's no problem with homework, it's just in the way you phrase your question. For example: What are the side effects of a pshydoplastic endomiam at room temperature and what will be the moral setbacks to newborn babies? is a badly asked question because it looks like it was taken right out of a textbook. You've obviously TRIED the homework and you're stuck at a relatively minor point, so you're merely asking for help, rather than asking for it to be done. Unfortunately, I have no clue, so wait for someone else : ). freshgavin TALK 04:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Never mind, I figured it out. It's just general stereoselection for reduction of ketones, attacking from the less-hindered side. Not sure why I didnt think of it in the first place, to be honest :)
Yep, you've got it. The incoming "hydride" (δ−ve hydrogen) has a choice between coming in past a δ−ve oxygen or coming in from the other side unhindered: it tends to come in from the other side. Physchim62 (talk) 13:03, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] head-to head clinical trials

What is a "head to head" clinical trial?

Matching two similar treatments to see which is better. For example, recruiting the next 20 patients with ear infections for a trial. Randomize 10 to receive 10 days of stompicillin, and give the other 10 patients 10 days of homeopathic gopher pellets. Measure all the relevant clinical parameters you can think of, such as fluid remaining in the ear at 10 and 20 days, number of days until pain gone, number of days until fever gone, number of days of school or work missed, and so forth. If this was your idea, you write it up for a medical journal. If this was sponsored by the makers of stompacillin they either publicize the results to every doctor in the US or bury the results (depending on the results of course). alteripse 02:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't seem like a very good testing method. First, 10 patients is so small of a sample that wild variations would be expected in results of repeated trials. But even with a reasonably large sample, all you prove is whether stompicillin is better or worse than gopher pellets. If gopher pellets are of no use whatsoever, or even harmful, then being better than gopher pellets isn't showing much. On the other hand, regulatory agencies such as the US Food and Drug Administration regularly approve meds which are less effective and have more side effects than existing treatments for the same condition. Perhaps such a test would discourage these approvals. StuRat 04:41, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
The necessary size of the trial depends on the magnitude of the difference you want to detect. A head to head trial simply compares two treatments against each other. It is not intended to prove effectiveness of either against no treatment. alteripse 04:54, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Further to Alteripse's point, interpreting the validity and importance of scientific studies is a very complex issue. That's why media reports based on a science journalist flipping through Nature or the New England Journal of Medicine, reading the abstract of some paper or other, and immediately jumping to conclusions, drive scientists batty. --Robert Merkel 08:10, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
And in either event, the sales of gopher pellets will continue... - Nunh-huh 04:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Indisputably. alteripse 04:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cricket lifespan

I was just curious how long the average species of cricket lives. Anybody?

Google it freshgavin TALK 04:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Satellite cover

How many satellites do you need to be able to see the whole surface of a planet from at least one of them at any moment? If the size of the planet matters, it's about half earth radius. My first guess was three (in GSO) but I don't think you'd be able to see the poles (esp. if there are valleys, etc. --대조 | Talk 06:10, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

It depends if you're talking 'metaphorically' or if you want a solution for the real world. If you think about it logically, you could see the entire world with only 2 sattelites at a fair distance, although as you said the poles (or the equator, if they were positioned at the poles) wouldn't make out very well. I don't think you'd lose much visibility because of mountains, valleys, but you'd certainly have to deal with quite a bit of distortion if you were hoping for 100% accurate pictures, especially around the edges of vision. With three forming a regular triangle (one at a pole and the other two over the opposite hemisphere) there would be weak visibility at two points on the equator, one on each side. Thus a forth (now two are over each hemisphere) would eliminate those and give you full cover.
It really depends on the technology you're using, how much detail you're hoping to get (probably the most important factor, it could take thousands of sattelites to take high-detail surface imaging of the entire world simultaneously), and what kind of results you're hoping to get. If those factors aren't really important, than I'd say four would work. freshgavin TALK 06:43, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

In reference to the theoretical rather than the real-world version of the problem, four is the minimum number of points you need to be able to view the whole world from them. Two points opposite each other leave a ring uncovered (since they can't be at infinite distance), and three points in a triangle leave two poles uncovered. But the question asked about satellites, not points in space. A satellite's orbit has to lie in a plane that passes through the center of the Earth, so it's not possible to have 4 satellites maintain a tetrahedral configuration.

There is an easy solution using 6 satellites: just put 3 each in two perpendicular orbits, e.g. an equatorial orbit and a polar orbit, spacing them equally around each orbit. By arranging things more trickily, you can do it with 5. But when this question was asked in the newsgroup rec.puzzles in 1994, Stein Kulseth topped that with this clever solution using 4 satellites in orbits that are nearly, but not quite, circular, and each in a slightly different orbital plane.

For real-world practicality, the 6-satellite solution would probably be best. --Anonymous, 08:10 UTC, January 26, 2006.


The other point to keep in mind is that real spy satellites are, apparently, in polar orbits at relatively low altitudes. --Robert Merkel 08:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Yea, geosynchronous orbits are at a height of 22,600 miles, at which distance it's difficult to make out much detail. Lower orbits are better, but reduce the field of view, requiring more satellites to cover everything. Also, a view from nearly straight above is desired, as views at sharp angles increase atmospheric interference and increase the number of details hidden behind vertical buildings and walls. So, a whole slew of spy satellites is far better. Also note that some areas demand our attention far more than others, so more satellites in those areas would make sense. We don't need many spy satellites over Easter Island, unless we think some evil supervillain is using it as a base to develop his evil weapon. Hmm, maybe this could be the next James Bond movie ? We could even have the evil supervillain crushed to death by a falling moai (giant statue). :-) StuRat 12:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
That's not how it works; as I understand it, a low polar orbit means that the satellites cover the Earth's surface in "stripes". So one satellite can do the lot if you're prepared to wait a week for your pictures. More satellites mean you get pictures more regularly. Of course, I have no idea precisely how often spy satellites can actually image a particular spot (I did know a guy who used to work for USAF intelligence; he probably knew, but telling me or anyone else would have been a good way to end up in prison for a long time). --Robert Merkel 12:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but the question was about how many satellites would be needed to see every spot on Earth simultaneously. That would require a great number, if usable level of detail was needed. StuRat 12:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I want to get a job where giving away secret information about my corporation can get somebody killed. freshgavin TALK 00:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks all. --대조 | Talk 13:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] particle accelerators

What would happen if you stood in the path of a high-energy particle accelerator beam (such as the LHC)? Would you feel anything? Would it impact your health? GeorgeStepanek\talk 09:29, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Depends if you were standing at the end just as they took the cover off - you could experience an Alien: Resurrection type of death... (from the hard vacuum). Tzarius 10:48, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I'd suppose the question is about the effects of highly accelerated particles hitting your body. I don't think there'd be any noticeable damage or feeling from that. The masses involved are much to small, so at most you'd have a few molecules being disturbed. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 11:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
That's not necessarily true. If a single proton hits you with 1 TeV, the worst it can do is knock out one atom of your DNA. Not much. But what if more than one per second per sq cm hit you? Go here (pdf) and see the beam parameters for LHC. The projected luminosity is apparently about 10^34 protons per square centimeter per second. That's a lot! That's about a trillion moles per second across every square centimeter. Each with 7 TeV. The only saving feature is that the beam is only 16 microns across. Let's put Kieff in there and see what happens :) -lethe talk 11:32, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Sounds fun! :D
But seriously, I don't think you'd feel anything. A few particles wouldn't cause much damage, alright, but a concentration like those would probably cause some direct effect on a cellular level but still, considering the short duration of the "beam" and how narrow it is, I don't believe it'd have a big effect. Regardless, I don't think our nociceptors would be activated by such form of damage at all. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 12:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
They're particles...I wouldn't think it'd make that much difference. It wouldn't be anything like Turok: Dinosaur Hunter where you get stunned and then a splode all over the place...oh, wait, that's a neutron accelerator...mahbad. 12.72.244.198 12:24, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi everyone, sorry to rain on your speculation, but I believe the answer is that it would kill you. The reason is the existance of particle showers--one proton will cascade into many particles in your body, and many of them will be able to knock out DNA and otherwise do cell damage. When you get hit by all the protons in the ring (on the order of ten trillion I believe, and it would happen almost instantaneously), you're talking a lot of cell damage. I've heard a story, from a fellow physicist, about a professor at a much lower-energy accelerator who got his head in the path of the beam somehow--his brain along the entire path of the beam died from the radiation damage, although he himself survived. -- SCZenz 23:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, "particle showers" or "collision casscades" will mean a lot more damage than one atom per incedent beam proton. If you ignore nuclear reactions that would occur at that sort of energys the damage would still be huge. the simulation software I have doesn't seem to work at those sorts of energies but at arouns 700MeV a single proton could dislodge over 8000 atoms. In our ion implanter a 9MeV gold beam at high enough currents can heat samples up to the point where they are visably glowing from the energy deposited as heat. --Martyman-(talk) 00:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Also hospitals use particle accelerators to accelerate protons at humans to destroy innoperable tumors. --Martyman-(talk) 00:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your answers. This is fascinating. So you'd have an immensely powerful but very narrow beam. Or would the "exit wound" be wider? Except the particles are moving so fast, just how much would the cascade be able to spread out? It would make an excellent death ray. GeorgeStepanek\talk 05:35, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

My intuition is that I don't think it would spread out very much at all, because there's so much momentum in the direction it's already going, but I think figuring this out exactly is a rather difficult problem. The more I think about it, the more I expect that all the tissue along the beam itself would die, but the effects on the rest of your body might be very limited with proper medical treatment; I'm not sure though. Anyway, the LHC is a lot of effort for a death ray, when bullets work just as well. -- SCZenz 06:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I've heard (from a person who has actually worked at CERN) that the whole accelerator tunnel (at least at the detectors) is so radioactive after the experiments, that the staff has to wait for at least half a year after the experiments have ended, before entering the tunnel. So the beam would certainly not be good for your health! — Pt (T) 22:01, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, looks like I was wrong.[94] There is some radioactive waste (from the luminosity monitors next to the detectors), but apparently that's not a big problem. Anyway, doing nuclear physics on/inside your own body wouldn't be a wise idea. — Pt (T) 02:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] R4 Gasses

Hello, Can you please help me out & tell me what R4 gasses are, whether they are harmful & where I can find some information about them. They are I believe not used in new applications anymore due to new regulations & (in the U.K.) have to be incinerated at licenced waste disposal facilities. That's all I've been able to find out though. I'd appreciate any information you can give me. Thanks AllanHainey 09:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

You could start at this web page, which says that R4 gases are pyrophoric (that's Greek for 'may blow your head off'). --Heron 23:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Much obliged. AllanHainey 11:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help With Electronic Chips

I am doing a project which requires me to work with 74ls245, 74l373 and 28c256. I have a problem since I am into computers and not into electronics as such. I would like to have the pin descritions of these chips(not the voltage level...).For eg, whether the pin is active low and some more information. I have tried searching for these but to no avail. I would be glad if you could help. (This question was posted at WP:RD/M but I figured you folks would be better equipped to answer this. 12.72.244.198 12:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC))

You seem to be looking for datasheets. Searching for 74LS245 datasheet produced, after following a couple of links, this page from Texas Instruments. The PDF file seems to be what you're looking for -- in particular, check the "Function Table" at the top of page 2. You should be able to find similar datasheets for your other ICs. Hope this helps! —David Wahler (talk) 13:49, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chemical smell from pot

(Not that kind of pot...)

I recently bought a cheap stainless steel pot from IKEA, and have noticed that when using it to boil water (practically all I've used it for) it gives off quite a harsh, chemical, metallic smell. I've noticed this before with cheap pots in the past (which is why I usually use my much-loved cast iron and copper...).

What is this, and is it dangerous? — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 16:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

When I first read this I thought it was the smell of pot (marijuana) which has a somewhat metallic smell. (unsigned comment by User:12.41.204.3)

  • I don't know exactly. But it could be residues of polishing chemicals and similar, although I assume you did wash the pot before using it. It could be a reaction with the sulphur on the surface of the metal, sulphur tends to make for smelly compounds, even in small amounts. The stainless used for pots needs to be able to be deep drawn, which usually means a higher sulphur content. Whatever it is, I doubt it is dangerous. It'll probably go away as soon as the pot has been burnt in. --BluePlatypus 17:48, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm not so confidant it's safe. I think you should wash it thoroughly with a detergent then boil water in it until it stops giving off fumes. Don't use the water you boil in it until then, either. Who knows what nasty chemical residue came on the pot. StuRat 17:50, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Asbestos, what kind of stove do you use, by the way? Electric or gas? Seeing as it's a metallic smell, it could also be just that: small metal particles left from the polishing. --BluePlatypus 18:39, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
    • I'm using a gas stove. Thanks for the comments above, I'll try giving it a good scrubbing and boiling water for an hour or so. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 18:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
      • Well, that explains your preference for copper pans and iron skillets. Gas stoves get (locally) much hotter than electric ones, so if it's some metal-surface reaction going on, that could certainly be a factor. --BluePlatypus 21:50, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

If you've ever boiled water and 'forgotten' about the pan that could be your culprit. I've burned at least 1 pan that way and it gives off a horrible smell after that, even to the point that it made my eggs smell bad too. I didn't die but I threw the pan away soon after that; it was only about $2. freshgavin TALK 23:44, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Radioactivity

Can it be possible to change one stable eliment to another stable eliment by forcing it to undergo radioactivity by bombarding radioactive particles? Or in any possible condition?

Yes. For instance, if you bombard Cobalt-59 (stable) with fast neutrons, neutron capture will occur, forming Cobalt-60 (radioactive) which will eventually decay, emitting a beta particle and giving you stable Nickel-60 as a result. --BluePlatypus 17:18, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes it is possible to change one stable eliment to another. Infact this was done in 1919 itself by Rutherford but he didnt know what happend. He actually changed Nitrogen into an isotope of oxygen.

I think the question is, can it be done without a radioactive intermediary. Actually, I believe it has been done using a nuclear accellerator, back in the days of the cyclotron. They managed to achieve the Alchemists dream of making gold, not out of Lead, but out of Mercury. You did actually specify 'radioactive' particles, so I presume Hydrogen-3 (Tritium) nuclei could be accellerated and made to merge with another elements nuclei, raising the atomic weight by 3 and the number by 1. You would have to choose the element very carefully, but I think Helium-3 would then make Lithium-6, which is stable.
Thank you very much!
Actually, gold has been made from lead (though at a steep price). See Alchemy#Modern 'alchemy'. Superm401 - Talk 07:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How to avoid the Google idiots

We have a constant problem with computer support here. You give a person a website over the phone or through email. They say it doesn't come up. You test it and it works. After going back and forth, you walk over to the next building and watch them type the URL in Google's search box and hit enter. This isn't a one-time issue. This happens over and over and over. I've even asked people, "Are you typing the address into Google or the address bar?" They say they are typing it into the address bar, but when you check, they are typing it into Google. Is this an anomoly of Google idiots here or is this a problem others have? If it is more common, does anyone have a solution other than remote-desktopping everyone's computer so you can tell them "move your cursor up - no up higher - higher - higher - higher - there. Click on that. THAT is the address bar you idiot!" --Kainaw (talk) 19:32, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

How would that cause problems? Google automatically gives you a link to the URL if you type one in. Are they actually so retarded that they don't follow it before asking for help? Or is there something else happening? Black Carrot 20:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I am sorry to say so, but yes, they are that retarded. I tried to get permission to put a sticker on top of the monitors that showed a picture of an address bar with a note saying "This is an address bar", but I was told that it made the employees feel dumb. Apparently it is OK for them to be dumb as long as they don't feel dumb. --Kainaw (talk) 20:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
The issue there is that some people are stupid, but does that justify treating everyone as stupid ? I get a bit offended when I call a support line and complain that an appliance isn't working, only to have them ask if I've plugged it in. Then again, some may have that exact problem. I also worked on a support line, so think it's best to assume they are intelligent until they prove otherwise. StuRat 08:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
You could try something in reverse. I don't actually think it's reasonable to expect people to know what "Address bar" means. Like "do you see the word Google near the top of the screen by a little box? You need to make sure you don't type in that little box." or even

"do you see the word Google near the top of the screen by a little box? Type the URL in that little box and press Return. What do you see? Good, that part is working. Now you need to type it in the different box, next to the word Address. Try that..." Notinasnaid 21:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Fight fire with fire. Instead of starting off with "type this address", start off with "search for ______ in google". freshgavin TALK 23:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I think it may work to ask them to use Google first. Then, they can't hide it when I ask if it says Google on the screen. They always say, "No. It didn't say Google anywhere until you came over." --Kainaw (talk) 00:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, maybe you could just tell them to hit "ALT-D" while the browser is in focus. --Uthbrian (talk) 07:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Both of my parents do the exact thing you describe, have done so for years, and steadfastly refuse to change their habits because the way they do it is "good enough" for them. (Nor are they willing to learn the meaning of the most basic terms such as "address bar". I haven't even been able to get them to understand that they can have more than one browser window open at the same time; I'm afraid to bring up the concept of tabs.) Short of changing the home page in their browsers to a blank screen (which would probably result in them cutting me out of their will), I don't see what can be done about it. All you can do is figure out some way of phrasing your question so you can at least be able to tell whether your given idiot valued employee is actually using the address bar or not and then ordering them to try the address bar if they haven't already. Perhaps something like, "Do you see the line of icons at the top of the window that say 'Back', 'forward', 'reload', and so on? You do? Goooood. Now see that long white box to the right of it? Goooood. Now take your mouse and point it at the pretty long white box ... No, not the actual mouse in your hand ... just use the mouse to make the arrow on your screen move up to the pretty white box..." --Aaron 08:01, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Some people really hate to use the address box because it requires that they type exactly the right thing. One character off and they get nothing, or garbage. A Google search, on the other hand, often pops up a "Do you mean..." prompt if you are at least close to the correct term. Makers of browsers seem to have noticed this and started minimizing the size of the address bar and maximizing the size of the search bar, as a result. They also sometimes have address bar entries that don't find a page automatically go to a search engine. Personally, I think that's a bit much, if I wanted to search, I would have picked "search". So, beware that it may be increasing more difficult for people to avoid doing a search accidentally. StuRat 08:27, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
  • If there's one thing Wikipedia has thought me, it's that there's a lot of people who fail to follow instructions even if they're staring right at them. Some people just don't want to do what someone else tells them to do and think their way is better. - Mgm|(talk) 08:58, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
A problem is that different browsers look different, also dependent on whether it's the default appearance. Referring to buttons saying 'back' and 'reload' and such wouldn't work in my case, for example. Probably the only thing all address bars have in common is that it's the highest piece of text against a white background in the browser window (then, of course, they'd have to know what a window is, oh dear). Although Opera doesn't have that either (can't remember now how to bring up the address bar in Opera). DirkvdM 10:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
You can also hide the address bar in many browsers, making things even worse. StuRat 12:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Can you not just change the default page on the company's browsers so that it is either blank or the company's website? Also, can you remove the Google toolbar? Then those who understand how to use an addressbar will also understand how to change the default page back, and those who don't won't be typing addresses into Google. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 13:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
When I first started college, I was so computer-illiterate that I tried putting an email address into the website address bar. Now I'm well on my way to complete HTML fluency. If I didn't learn anything else, at least knowing how to use a computer helped. Captain Jackson 15:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
My Spanish teacher last year always used the Google search box as well. At the time, we speculated on what would happen when she found a page they didn't index (thank God I don't live in China). Superm401 - Talk 08:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] doggy medical need devices

i would like to know where i could find pattern or direction for diapers, and any thing that aides a dog,just basic directions that i could adapt for size and need. I have a 17 yr old dog and at times she needs help walking, and use of diapers. i have made other things in the past myself that were cheaper and more comfortable. thankyou

I found this page which has some links that may be useful to you. But, seriously, have you discussed your dog's condition with a vet? While I'm neither a vet nor able to assess your dog's actual condition, I have to wonder - if your dog is so incontinent it needs diapers, and struggles to move, whether another course of action might be in the best interests of the welfare of your dog if rather traumatic for you. I apologise if am misinterpreting your description of your dog's condition. --Robert Merkel 07:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Population

If one were searching for a recent US census report on the populations of major cities (NY, LA, Houston, etc), where would one look? Black Carrot 20:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, either in my sock-drawer, or at www.census.gov. --BluePlatypus 21:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
The census site is probably the safer of the two places to look. Don't go near the sock-drawer. Grutness...wha? 07:03, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spicy foods & eyesight

After eating a rather spicy Indian meal, I noticed that colours, which normally look a bit flat to me, appeared very bright and vivid, as if turning up the contrast on a TV. Is this a documented phenomenon and/or are there any possible reasons? smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

If this was just one particular meal, I would speculate that someone might have slipped something like magic mushrooms into it, since this is exactly the sort of effect that many people report. If it is all meals... a different story. Notinasnaid 21:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
It's always, after all spicy Indian/Chinese/Mexican etc. meals. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 21:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I seem to recall that a few people report psychic effects from monosodium glutamate. Of course it would be pure speculation on my part to suggest that that has anything to do with your observations. It might be more fun not to find out; what if people told you you were imagining it, and you believed them, and it went away? --Trovatore 22:04, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Interesting. I remember reading somewhere (but I don't remember where) that your vision actually decreases after eating a large meal. Cybergoth 22:12, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Are any other senses affected, or just your sight? It's also possible that it might just be waking you up and feel less dull in general. Night Gyr 22:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Just sight. It seems to be to do with spiciness (eating a korma has nowhere near the same effect as a jalfrezi and madras). smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 22:33, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I remember reading something about being able to see into the future after eating too much spice. --BluePlatypus 23:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe it's some form of synaesthesia? —Keenan Pepper 23:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

It would be neat to test this scientifically. We could come up with something similar to tests for color-blindness, a series of dots with only a subtle color difference, that, if detected, allows you to see a hidden picture. If you couldn't make out the pic normally, but could after eating spicy foods, that would be proof that it works. Even more exciting would be if nobody else could see the pic, but only you could after eating the spice. This would prove it's not just a perception issue, but that your eyesight really was enhanced over a normal person's eyesight. If that was the case, isolating the chemical(s) causing this effect would be the next step, leading to a new nutritional supplement. StuRat 08:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

See Curry#Curry_addiction. Maybe that's why I like curry powder in my spinach. DirkvdM 10:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
See also Capsaicin#Capsaicin_high.

--Bartosz 04:45, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] methonal water mix

was just wondering if anyone had heard if there was any type of reaction when water and methonal were mixed and then put into a Aluminum tank. We ran into a problem with it eating away at the aluminum.

There's no such thing as "methonal", and methanol wouldn't react with aluminum, as far as I know. —Keenan Pepper 23:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Nope. The pKa of methanol is 15.2, which means that it's far too weak an acid to do something. Neither water, methanol or a mixture of them should have any effect on aluminium. I'd say it would have to be something else. --BluePlatypus 23:24, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
On the other hand, this MSDS says "Do not store in aluminum or lead containers.". I wonder why that is? —Keenan Pepper 23:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I'm finding a lot of sites that say methanol is corrosive to aluminum. Maybe it does something to the protective oxide layer? —Keenan Pepper 23:49, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, on the other hand, that is very possible. Naked aluminium is quite reactive. If the oxide layer is too thin, or damaged, then the methanol could probably eat away at it quickly. --BluePlatypus 00:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Methanol can definitely corrode some metals, which can be a pain when running a car on the stuff. My chemistry text book has image of some rods from a methanol engine covered in holes and damage. It might be methanol acting as a solvent or forming methanoic acid. It could also be removing the layer of Aluminium oxide from the aluminium, damaging it that way. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 10:48, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, methanol is corrosive to aluminium, magnesium and lead. The main distinction with water is that the methoxides are soluble in methanol, whereas aluminium oxide is insoluble in water: hence, as soon as corrosion gets started, it continues. Physchim62 (talk) 13:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Cool, that makes sense. I'll add it to the Methanol article. —Keenan Pepper 16:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 27

[edit] Speaking of GSO, space elevator

Assuming it's gonna be built (a pretty big assumption I'd say) and they decide to build the hub station on land instead of water (another rather large assumption) what (equatorial) country do you think it would be based in? Let's put the time at +50 years from now. I'd vote for Brazil, though it would be in less-than-perfect area in the north away from the Metropolitan centers. freshgavin TALK 00:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Brad Edwards's NIAC study suggests that Ecuador or Tanzania would be good locations if a land-based anchor was chosen. --Robert Merkel 00:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
They make some good points, although it seems they're aiming for international waters, and it's not really a land-based anchor! freshgavin TALK 03:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Why would you put a space elevator at the Equator? Wouldn't the most obvious place be the North or south pole? That way it would be in generally the same spot.

  • A space elevator has one end attached to the ground (so it is in "generally the same spot") and rises upward to geostationary orbit and beyond. Geostationary orbit is over the equator. Or in the Earth's rotating reference frame, the space elevator is held up by centrifugal force, which is directly upward only at the equator. The thing cannot exist anywhere else. Further, there are asymmetries in the Earth that make some points on the equator are better than others, but I forget the details. --Anonymous, 06:20 UTC, January 27.
At the equator, objects traveling up the elevator will gain the greatest kinetic energy possible by that method, and can easily be placed in geosynchronous orbit. The elevator can also be stabilized with a counterweight in orbit. Achieving a stable polar orbit would be highly impractical. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 04:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Though I'd like to try it just for fun! Screw escape velocity. freshgavin TALK 05:46, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
The kinetic energy reason is also why space agencies launch from as close to the equater as possible (The US launches from the far south, Russia launches from Central Asia, and Europe uses French Guiana). Given that - of those three - French Guana is the closest to the equator (5° N) and already has the technical equipment for space industry close-by. Other viable possibilities would be Gabon, Kenya, Malaysia and Indonesia, although the earthquake-prone nature of the latter makes it more problematic. Grutness...wha? 07:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not convinced of the feasibility of a space elevator. Finding materials which can withstand the forces would be quite an issue. Assuming they are found, and the elevator shaft can be built for a mere million dollars per kilometer, at a height of 35,786 km that would still be 36 trillion dollars, which nobody seems to have just lying around. If a world effort was made to build it (over decades), then some political method would be needed to assure access to it by the contributors. This would be similar to issues with the Suez and Panama canals. Nobody would be willing to contribute that much money without knowing they have permanent access to the result. Perhaps an "international zone", similar to Antarctica, could be established around the base to prevent the surrounding country from having veto power over who can use it. StuRat 07:35, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Pretty much all equatorial countries are politically unstable. Maybe the Maldives would be willing to give away part of their southern territory on exchange for a rescue plan for their islands (which are going to be swamped by a rising sea). Geologically most stable would be in the Pacific (the biggest plate), but the remoteness might be a problem with construction (getting building material and other resources in) and usage (if it's going to be used for space tourism you'd want population and transportation centres nearby). DirkvdM 11:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course, if you're going to build a 35,786 km tall elevator, it wouldn't be much of an addition to build it a km or two longer and place it on the sea floor. StuRat 12:45, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
In which case the elevator could also have a 'basement' level and we would have a choice between going into space or to the sea floor. DirkvdM 13:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Building it to the sea floor is an interesting idea but would definitely increase the engineering complexity. Remember that the pressure difference for every 10 m (33 feet) of ocean depth is equivalent to the entire difference between air pressure at sea level and outer space. Also, underwater structures are a helluvalot harder to access for routine maintenance than those on dry land. Further, as a political solution it could backfire: there might be more countries willing to try to seize the tower by force if there's no country that owns it. --Anonymous, 20:30 UTC, January 28.
failing that, some Pacific nations (like Tuvalu) are in a similar fix to the Maldives. Grutness...wha? 22:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
StuRat, have a look at Brad Edwards' proposal. He makes a reasonably convincing case that if carbon nanotubes composites of sufficient strength become available (which I fully agree is a big "if") that a useful space elevator can be constructed for a cost of less than $10 billion dollars. Chicken feed compared to, say, missile defence, the F-22, or ethanol-related pork barelling. --Robert Merkel 09:22, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nuclear energy to treat disease

Hello, my name's Kate. I have been searching through the net for a few hours now, possibly more, and can not find much information on how nuclear energy is used to treat diseases. I pretty much understand the side effects, as well as the benifits as well, but i dont really understand how it actually works and how it is used. Could you please help me? Thank You. Kate.

There's an article on Nuclear_medicine concerning radiopharmaceuticals. freshgavin TALK 00:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
See also radiotherapy. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Radiation is also used for diagnostic purposes in medicine, in things like PET scanners, NMR and Radium is used in some cancer therapies. Radon therapy is also a more left-field treatment still in use. Grutness...wha? 07:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
There is one example I remember that helped me to understand how nuclear energy could be used to treat disease (hopefully it's simple yet accurate, I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong). It is the use of iodine to treat thyroid cancer. The thyroid (in your neck) concentrates any iodine in your body. So, if you absorb some iodine a fair amount will go to the thyroid. If you have thyroid cancer, you can take some radioactive iodine, a lot of which will end up in your thyroid. Although the radioactive iodine will kill many good cells, since it concentrates in the same place as the cancer cells, hopefully many cancer cells will die - and you will live.--Commander Keane 19:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
That's correct, and recently metastasized thyroid cancer cells throughout the body also have an affinity for iodine, so will absorb the radioactive iodine and be destroyed, as well. Of course, all this completely destroys the thyroid, so thyroid replacement therapy is needed, say by taking Synthroid for the rest of your life. Not a bad tradeoff for curing cancer. StuRat 20:58, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


You might alsolook at Nuclear Magnetic Resonance which is now called Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) because of the public's dislike of things with nuclear in the title. DJ Clayworth 17:46, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Darrieus wind turbines

I was just reading about Darrieus wind turbines and I was somewhat confused by the airfoil diagrams in the article; These diagrams show the lift vector on the airfoil as having a forward component. When I learned aerodynamics I was taught that the lift vector always had a rearwards component and that this is what creates induced drag. So, is there something I'm missing? How is it possible to have an airfoil with a forward-leaning lift vector? -User:Lommer | talk 00:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Are you saying the horizontal component (horizontal as in the illustration) of the lift vector should be reversed, or the entire vector? It's been a while since I took turbomachines, but I might give it a try. deeptrivia (talk) 03:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
You're almost right, Lommer - except that the lift vector on an aerofoil points slightly more 'backwards' (due to induced drag) than the 'ideal' lift vector (which is always perpendicular to the incoming flow). This is going to be somewhat tricky to explain in words, but I'll try.
Take a look at this aerofoil diagram. To translate this to our windmill case, Vinf is red arrow on the windmill picture. The ideal lift vector is the one indicated in green on that same drawing - it's always perpendicular to the incoming flow. However, the aerofoil, by creating lift also creates downwash (also see induced drag), which alters the direction of the incoming flow by adding to it a component parallel to the 'ideal' lift (labelled Vind on the aerofoil diagram). This has the effect of altering the 'effective' (as seen from the aerofoil's perspective) angle of attack, which tilts the lift vector 'backwards' (see the arrow labelled Normal Force F on the aerofoil diagram - it's perpendicular to the 'effective' incoming flow). Now, back to the windmill diagram: Change the direction of the incoming flow (red arrow) by adding a component parallel and opposite to the green arrow. This reduces the angle of attack and tilts the lift vector backwards. However, because the angle of attack of this aerofoil is so great, it doesn't tilt the 'new' lift vector back beyond the vertical (towards the centre pivot), therefore, the lift still provides a component in the left direction, turning the windmill.
So, in a way, you were right - induced drag means that the lift vector must always point more 'backwards' than the ideal lift vector (creating a drag component). However, it must always point more backwards than the ideal lift vector which is perpendicular to the incoming flow - hence, for a situation like this, with a large angle of attack, the lift vector can point "forward" with respect to the aerofoil geometry.
I hope that made sense :) — QuantumEleven | (talk) 10:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] https

The following discussion is an archived debate of a problem I was having with my firewall

Please do not modify it, unless of course you want to.

The result of the debate was DISABLE NORTONS' Built in Firewall--Aolanon... 03:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


For some odd reason, every single time I try to log into anything, I get a "page cannot be displayed" message, happens with anything that requries a .cgi script, seems to keep me from logging into any type of mail server, in this case yahoo, at first I thought their server might be down, but it's been a few days... still nothing The only thing I can think of, is that this is a brand new computer, and it's possible there's some security setting that's causing this????--Aolanon... 00:23, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

There could be a range of problems here, and the first step to solving it is to get all the details. How exactly are you connected to the internet? If you are connected exactly the same way on your new computer as on your old computer (by ethernet cable, maybe?), one possibility is that your TCP/IP settings have not been transferred to the new computer. If you're using Windows, do an ipconfig in command prompt on both the old computer and the new computer, and see if the results are the same or different. More details about your connection type and operating system would be appreciated. -- Daverocks (talk) 01:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Windows XP Home Edition, both computers, currently using a linksys router to connect to a broadband connection, and my old computer was buggy enough that I never even bothered with file/settings transfer from the old machine, to the new, so there's really no basis for comparison--Aolanon... 02:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

A little bit more information, this only seems to happen when a form takes me from a secure, to unsecure internet connection, as in http to https--Aolanon... 02:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Ok, I think I've confirmed it, the problem seems to be that I can't load any https pages at all, the only thing I can't figure out is why it's doing this all of a sudden--Aolanon... 02:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Have you been playing with the firewall settings on your computer or router? HTTPS uses a different port to HTTP(80). --Martyman-(talk) 02:41, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I think that's it actually, the newer computer came prebundled with Norton Security Center, which seems to have taken on a life of it's own, now that I look at it, it's somehow turned it's own firewall back on, even though I had it disabled, and now it doesn't want to shut off--Aolanon... 02:56, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
No, wait, this is driving me nuts, I just checked again, and despite Norton's quirky behavior, I don't think that's it either, according to Norton, ports 80, 81, and 82 are not blocked, so that shouldn't be causing this problem then--Aolanon... 03:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Problem solved, it was Norton after all... It took a bit of doing but I got it to back down, and now everything works again.. or at least it's close enough--Aolanon... 03:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of this reference desk question. Please do modify it, as much as you like.

[edit] diesel Generating Sets

Is it possible to adjust the frequency of diesel Generating sets. --61.0.135.181 01:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Theoretically, yes. You can even buy some diesel gensets that are switchable between 50 and 60 Hz output (for instance, this Chinese company sells one. But as to whether this is possible, or easy, with your particular genset is another question entirely. --Robert Merkel 07:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is the sugar important in the fermentation process of making vinegar??? How?

Greetings!

I am asking the question: "Is the sugar important in the fermentation process of making vinegar??? How?" because we need more information of the function of the sugar in the fermentation process of making vinegar for my group's investigatory project... We have to prove to others that sugar aside from yeast also influences the fast decreasing of the pH value in making vinegar...

Please help me!!!

Your efforts will be very much appreciated... If ever you have useful references for the answer we need, please post them too... Thank you!!!

                                                      Daren

Of course! Sugar is the main ingredient. It's the sugar that's getting fermented. See fermentation, vinegar, Acetic_acid#Fermentation, etc.deeptrivia (talk) 03:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problems reading pictures from CD

I burned some pics on a cd in 2002. Now I can't open the pics. It says that a plug-in is missing or the files are corrupt. When I burnt the cd i could open the pics (on my old pc) even from the cd. What's going wrong and how can I recover the pictures? Thanks! deeptrivia (talk) 03:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Without more information the only thing I can assume is that the CD is damaged (scratched, warped by heat, etc.) and your CD drive is having trouble reading the header of the CD (the part at the beginning where it gives information about the rest of the CD).
It may also be that the pictures are in an old format that your PC doesn't recognize, but I can't tell without more information : ). freshgavin TALK 03:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! Assuming a part of the CD, like the header, is damaged, what ways of data recovery exist? What more information would be helpful? deeptrivia (talk) 03:41, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
By the way, it shows all the files and their correct sizes. But when I open them, it says they are corrupt. deeptrivia (talk) 04:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
What kind of files are they? (What is the file extention?) freshgavin TALK 04:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
They are all JPG files. deeptrivia (talk) 04:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, it's a little bit odd that it shows the file info correctly but won't display the images. If there's no visual damage to the CD (obviously look for scratches or strange coloring on the data side) then there's a few other possible reasons. Some types of blank CDs don't work so well in some types of CD readers (problems generally come from cheap CDs and cheap CD readers) so you could try it on someone elses computer. freshgavin TALK 04:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, try a different CD player. Specifically, be sure you are using a CD-only reader. Combo CD/DVD readers sometimes make compromises to support both formats that can cause reading errors. StuRat 07:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I can't say if this will definitely work, but you can try Isobuster. --Uthbrian (talk) 07:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

This does not sound like a broken CD. The message doesn't suggest that at all. "Missing plug-in" is all about software. Make sure you are trying to open the JPEG files in a suitable program. DON'T just double click on them. Notinasnaid 09:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Try to find a copy of the program you saved them with -- it may have idiosyncracies in its format that show up as corruption to whatever you're using now. Night Gyr 12:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for all your messages. The CD is not damaged, i think. There are abt 10 folders on it, just one doenst work. I burnt three sessions on it (almost all photos). The folder i burnt on the last session, doesnt work. I tried to upload one of the pics on wikipedia, to give an idea of the kind of corruption it might be, but it doesn't upload it, giving the error: "The file is corrupt or has an incorrect extension. Please check the file and upload again." What can I do? deeptrivia (talk) 15:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Could you upload a sample onto a public webspace somewhere? Tripod will give you 20MB quick. enochlau (talk) 17:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Here is a sample picture. Could you suggest a good software to recover as much as possible from corrupted JPGs, or some other means to rescue these pictures? Thanks!
Okie dokes. I couldn't get it to open, and I think I have evidence that your CD is borked. I opened up the file in a hex editor, and the JPEG magic number that I found at the start of all my good JPEG files was found in the middle of the file, so the CD is probably indicating where the files start/end wrong. Also, large sections of the file were the same character, which is unusual for a JPEG file, since it's not a bitmap - further suggestions that it's corrupted. :( enochlau (talk) 22:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
The file is OK except that it has 4096 bytes of garbage in front of it and presumably an equal amount of data missing from the end. I've uploaded the image without the first 4kb here. This suggests that enochlau's guess about the start/end offsets on the CD is probably correct. There are programs that can recover JPEG files from corrupted or accidentally formatted disks by scanning for the magic numbers — you may want to try one of them. Those programs usually can't handle fragmented files, but since CDs are normally never fragmented you should have no such problems in this case. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 23:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks a ton Ilmari and enochlau! You guys rock!! Could you tell me how did you fix this file, and how can I do the same? Can you suggest a good program which does this thing automatically? deeptrivia (talk) 01:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
See User_talk:Ilmari_Karonen#The_corrupted_JPEG_file. enochlau (talk) 06:19, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Human ancestry tree

Are all the Hominids (? ) ( neanderthals, erectus, and all) HUMANS? I mean, they aren't modern humans because they aren't homo sapiens, but can they be called Human? or just hominid?.--Cosmic girl 04:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Not being a native English speaker, you may not know that "homos" is also an insulting slang term for homosexuals. Your meaning here was quite clear, but I just wanted to point that out so you don't get in trouble using the term elsewhere. For example, calling a group of men "homos" instead of "people" would be a very bad thing. StuRat 06:58, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I didn't know that! I'm sorry...this is embarassing, but thank you for telling me! I already fixed the question,I hope it's understandable.--Cosmic girl 16:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

No problem, glad I could teach you a bit of English slang. StuRat 20:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
According to Homo (genus), even Neanderthal should not be called part of the Homo sapiens (human) species. But Neanderthal makes the point that some people suspect that humans and Neanderthal could interbreed. --JWSchmidt 04:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
They're probably best called hominids, since human really refers to a specific species. The distinction isn't very large, though, and if we're going to name the genus "same as us", we might as well call the other species "human" too. I think the main reason for using "hominid" instead is the tendency for people to want special status above animals. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 04:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. How close to us a species needs to be to be considered "human" is just a matter of opinion. StuRat 06:45, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Nitpick: The genus name Homo is not from the Greek homos meaning "same", it's from the Latin homo, homin- meaning "man". —Keenan Pepper 06:33, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
A somewhat finer picking: My Dutch 'foreign words' dictionary says that 'homo-' (as a prefix) indeed stems from Greek for 'same' and that 'homo' (as a word) is Latin for human and is related to the word 'humus', for 'earth' (in the sense of ground, soil). DirkvdM 11:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm half Neanderthal (my father was one), and I get very upset when people try to suggest that I'm not a human. -lethe talk 06:48, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Are you serious Lethe? or is that a joke? I thought Neanderthals where extinct long ago.--Cosmic girl 16:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's a joke, LOL. StuRat 20:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

The term "human", in common usage, refers specifically to Homo sapiens. However, broadly speaking, it may also refer to any members of the genus Homo. See [95] (click on second definition, "noun"). Or for instance, when Homo floresiensis was discovered, Scientific American called it "The Littlest Human" on its cover. You will often find "modern humans" or "anatomically modern humans" written in texts dealing with human evolution to differentiate us from our close ancestors. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Another nitpick. The name hominid properly refers to a species in the family Hominidae, which is generally considered to include humans and the great apes — gorillas, chimpanzees and orangutans. Unfortunately there isn't a widely-understood scientific term meaning "modern humans and other hominids more closely related to humans than chimpanzees". In some classifications this group is classified as the subtribe Hominina, so you could try using the term homininan. But few people will understand what you mean. Gdr 12:23, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I asked this because I read the article about Homo Floresiensis and I also read the article in New Scientist and saw that they where called 'humans' so wondered, since what stage in evolution can some ape or great ape be considered human?. --Cosmic girl 16:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, the term "human" is a bit vague. If you mean the same species as us, which is defined as being able to breed with us and produce fertile offspring, then apes are definitely out, but Neanderthals and Homo Floresiensis might be included. Also note that apes are not direct ancestors of humans, as anti-science religious zealots always say is claimed by Evolution. All of our ancestors are extinct. The nearest common descendent isn't even the apes, but rather chimpanzees/bonobos with 98% genetic material in common with us. StuRat 20:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
But chimpanzees are apes! (And so, at least biologically, are humans.) Gdr 22:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Which suggests that all humans are apes, but not all apes are humans. JackofOz 22:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Right, we're not descendants of apes, we are apes. A common misconception, not just among religious zealots. DirkvdM 13:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you guys, I understand :D --Cosmic girl 03:40, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] scratching an itch

How do you scratch an itch in side a spacesute? Say like your nose or the bottom of your foot? I have saked this question several time but no answer.

I've heard that they actually have something inside the helmet for that purpose (and I assume it serves some other useful purpose too), like a small protrusion that you can touch to your face by looking down, but as for scratching the bottom of your foot ... we have enough trouble trying to itch down there standing on Earth! freshgavin TALK 05:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Related question: what does a concert pianist do when he itches? I've had this problem, wanting to scratch but not wanting to stop playing. And then realised that that would be hell if I were to ever perform before an audience. Irrespective of where the itch is, although that can make it even worse (some spots one does not scratch in public). DirkvdM 11:29, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Just switch to one of those pieces for one-handed pianists until you're done scratching, LOL. But seriously, if that was a problem on a regular basis you might want to liberally apply a lotion containing menthol-eucalyptus right before the concert, that should both relieve dry skin and act as a topical anesthetic to prevent itching. Also, avoid itchy clothes like wool. If the itching persists, it may have a psychological basis (a manifestation of anxiety ?). StuRat 12:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, it's hardly ever a problem, it's just that when it happens it's really annoying. But then, during a concert, the anxiety thing might kick in. Especially now that you've pointed that out to me, it is sure to worry me, and therefore happen, whenever I give a concert. Thanks a lot! luckily, I'm not a concert pianist. By the way, I only know of one piano piece for one hand, by Ravel. Are there any more? The one by Ravel is said to be almost impossible to play, so there can't be a big 'market' for it. DirkvdM 16:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
"Twinkle, twinkle, little star". You can play that with one finger, LOL. StuRat 20:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
There are lots of pieces for one hand, but they get little commercial notice. Most of them are for left hand, but there are some for right hand too. I have a volume (edited by Raymond Lewenthal) of one-handed pieces by such composers as Alkan, Bartok, Blumenfeld, Godowsky, Liszt, Moszkowski, Reger, Saint-Saens, and Scriabin. It also includes pieces arranged by others for one hand piano, eg. Godowsky arranged Chopin's Etude in E flat minor, Op.10/6, for left hand. Sounds impossible, but that was chicken feed for Leopold. Also see [96] for a discussion of the history and repertoire of music for piano one-hand. Enjoy. JackofOz 22:36, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
BTW, what's the Ravel piece, Dirk? I don't think I've ever heard of it. JackofOz 05:23, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Piano Concerto for the Left Hand (Ravel). See that little box at the left top of this page, where it says 'search'...? :) DirkvdM 13:43, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course! I thought you were talking about pieces for piano solo (that's what "piano piece" normally means). Nothing is considered 'impossible' for pianists these days, just 'challenging'. The Ravel is in the repertoire of a large number of pianists and has had umpteen recordings. Prokofiev, Richard Strauss, Korngold, and others all wrote concertos for left hand too. :-) JackofOz 14:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
BTW, I hope that sort of information was what you were after. I assume "Are there any more?" wasn't a rhetorical question. :-) Cheers JackofOz 01:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I guess the same question could apply to any performance artist. The answer would be that they are far too involved in what they are doing to be bothered by an itch. This reminds me of the little boy being taught about birth, who was desperate to know what would happen if the woman wanted a pee while she was having a baby. --Shantavira 16:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
And since a sneeze gives an almost orgasmic feeling, I once wondered what would happen if one would sneeze during an orgasm, but I suppose that is not very likely either. Same for a good crap, but that's even less likely. :) DirkvdM 16:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Ewwww ! Either you enjoy defecating way too much or sex way too little, to think they are equivalent, LOL. StuRat 20:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
See Blumpkin Night Gyr 02:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh dear me, I've gotten used to others already having come up with weird ideas of mine, but I certainly didn't expect that to be the case here. Turns out there are others as weird as me. That's scary. DirkvdM 13:43, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] white blood cells

Very interesting facts about white blood cells. I was just wondering where white blood cells come from ?

It depends on their production. They most commonly come from either the bone marrow or the thymus, hence the names B cells and T cells. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 05:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

B and T cells are only a subset of the WBCs in the body. There are other WBCs, including monocytes, neutrophils, and eosinophils. Where they come from depends on how far back you care to look; the most recent ancestors of the WBCs would be the uni- and bipotential stem cells (i.e. CFC-G, CFC-GM, CFC-M, and CFC-EO).
Where blood cells (including WBCs) are formed changes throughout life. WBCs aren't produced until the second fetal month, when they are generated in the liver, spleen, and thymus (during the so-called hepatosplenothymic phase). Later, this shifts to the bone marrow and lymphoid tissue (e.g. spleen, thymus, lymph nodes), where it continues into adulthood. Hope that helps, David Iberri (talk) 06:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
though probably the notion that T cells come from the thymus needs correction. "T cells" (in the adult) originate in the bone marrow. They mature in, but don't originate in, the thymus. Under normal circumstance, there shouldn't be any blood-cell production in the adult liver, spleen, or lymph nodes. - Nunh-huh 22:48, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Good point about T cells, which again points to the "how far back you want to look" idea. Regarding extramedullary hematopoiesis, it's my understanding that minimal (i.e. negligible) hematopoiesis occurs in lymphoid tissue even in healthy adults. Also, to nitpick an earlier post, the B in B cell isn't for bone marrow; it's for bursa of Fabricius. --David Iberri (talk) 05:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CV21 - who owns it ?

does anyone know about www.cv21.co.uk......is it a secret advertising/design agency?

i have tryed to contact them but they do not reply.... as i have heard they work for free if you are the right client...

please advise as i would like to know if anyone has had any luck contacting them.

regards

Mr Hall (OBE)

Your question was answered here. User:AlMac|(talk) 11:49, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Please do not post your questions more than once. We may not know the answer to your question, are still figuring it out, or are refusing to answer for one of the reasons stated at the top of this page. Asking us a second time will not likely get you your answer either, and almost guarantees you we will be ignoring you in the future. Your question may be deleted if you see this notice; you should reformat it to prevent this from happening.
As several people have posted other places that you have posted this question, we have no idea what you are referring to? Who owns it depends on what "it" is. You know a lot more about "it" than anyone who can help advise you. User:AlMac|(talk) 10:03, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Water as a fuel

Hi, I read in my sceince text book that it can be possible to use water as a fuel for the cars in near future. Hydrogen and Oxygen is diffused by electrolysis and the produced Hydrogen is combusted for producing energy.After combustion the Hydrogen gets oxydized and again forms water. But there are some problems like its difficult to control the combustion of Hydrogen because its like a blast. and because after combustion it form water in exhaust making it wet and electrolysis of water on large scale to produce enough energy to drive a car. But would it be possible to do this? If yes then it would be very revolutionary step in the world of science. Any explaination would be thankful. --Manasmdk 10:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)manasmdk

See our article on Hydrogen economy, which gives a quite detailed overview of the concept. Note that hydrogen could not serve as a fuel in the sense of directly providing energy (since the whole system would still need energy input for electrolysis), only as a means of transporting/distributing energy after electrolysis has occured at some convenient place -- Ferkelparade π 11:02, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Hydrogen explosions are not difficult to control. Internal combustion engines use explosions all the time. There's also no problem with forming water in exhaust - bear in mind other fuels - gasoline, etc. produce water during combustion as well, as they are carbohydrates...in fact most of the energy in these fuels come from the release of protons (hydrogen) and high energy electrons which had been earlier stored in organic material for decades...when combined with a highly electronegative element like oxygen, energy is produced. Hydrogen doesn't have the high energy bond, but it still remains the primary source of energy in a fuel...so pure hydrogen is a fuel in itself. The problem is in its density - organic molecules tend to have more mass over less space because of intermolecular forces as well as sharing of electron orbital pairs, thereby making lots of fuels a liquid (including ethanol and gasoline)...for example propane or methane are less so (which is why it isn't often an automobile fuel). The difference is that gasoline might contain many impurities and pollutants, nitrites, sulfides, sulphates, etc. making it impure, when hydrogen would have no such mixtures. This is because organic matter such as plants extract minerals from the soil during their life, incorporate sulfur and nitrogen into their amino acids - when the proteins (made up of amino acids) decompose, the sulfur and the nitrogen in them breaks off and forms new compounds in the organic matter and become pollutants when burnt (forming nitrogen oxide, sulfur oxide, etc.. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 11:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Storing hydrogen is difficult because as a gas it takes up so much room, and it has to be very cold and/or under a lot of pressure to make it a liquid, either of which are dangerous in a car. Internal combustion engines are also quite inefficient due to all the heat energy that is wasted and due to the weight of the engine and other heavy components. Fuel cells have the potential to provide for more efficient combustion of hydrogen and oxygen. One last problem to overcome is the lack of places to fuel up with hydrogen. If there aren't sufficient gas stations, the hydrolysis of water to produce hydrogen could be done in your home, using electricity. Instead of just releasing the oxygen produced, it could be used to increase the efficiency of natural gas burned in the furnace, water heater, and gas stove. This would be especially good if the combustion could be made efficient enough to allow venting of the gases inside the home, which is normally only done for gas stoves. This is due to the toxicity of unburned and partially burned gas and the removal of oxygen from the air, which can eventually lead to the formation of deadly carbon monoxide. The water vapor would still be a problem, however, condensing on windows and cold plumbing fixtures. Perhaps a dehumidifier would be needed. StuRat 12:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
One other problem with storing hydrogen is the para/ortho problem. When very cold the ortho converts slowly to para and releases energy, heating up the liquid and eventually causing a container breach. There are catalysts which can convert the ortho to para prior to liquifying.
Lithium hydride storage devices have shown promise for storing hydrogen. This would avoid the problems involved in storing hydrogen in high pressure containers. The biggest problem with this whole concept is that it takes energy to electroylse water, lots of energy. So far this comes largely from fossil fuels, so a hydrogen economy would not do much to reduce our fossil fuel consumption.
Yes, a new round of nuclear reactors, this time deep in mines far from populated areas, is needed to replace the aging surface reactors placed near populated areas right now. People will not, and should not, accept the level of risk (especially in this modern age of terrorism) associated with these surface reactors. StuRat 14:46, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Hydrogen gas can also be very dangerous, too. The most infamous example would be the Hindenburg disaster. KILO-LIMA 15:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The evidence seems to suggest that a flammable coating on the outside of the Hindenburg is what caused the fire, although the hydrogen inside burnt, too. The bright orange flames described by witnesses are inconsistent with a straight hydrogen fire, which should be blue to clear. So, while hydrogen is flammable, so is gasoline. There is one thing that makes hydrogen worse, though, the need to store it either pressurized or at very low temps to make it liquid. A leak in a pressurized system is likely to leak a lot more than in an unpressurized system, so that's the problem there. The low temp storage will cause hydrogen to boil off as it warms up, so it will need to be vented continuously, which is also a fire hazard. Also, a massive leak of liquid hydrogen could be deadly even if it doesn't catch fire. If the occupants were doused in liquid hydrogen they could die or suffer severe "burns". StuRat 20:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
About your suggestion of nuclear energy. An advantage that has over solar and wind power is that it is a more reliable source (in case there is no sun or wind). But since this is about producing energy storage (in the form of hydrogen) that doesn't matter. Also, a problem with cars is that they are designed to carry their own power supply with them, which is rather inefficient - in order to transport one person you have to lug along a machine that weighs over ten times more than that person. So use wind or sun, store in hydrogen when there is excess energy to burn when there isn't enough (avoids transportation and pressurisation problems), and use the electricity to drive alternating magnets under the roads that magnets in cars can use to propell themselves. Of course this requires a serious change in the infrastructure - all infrastructure. Might there be a better way to propell cars with an external energy source? DirkvdM 14:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
The millions of square km that would need be covered with solar panels and/or windmills to supply all the energy currently supplied by gasoline would create quite a "visual blight" as well as environmental damage from plants that would no longer get sunlight, etc. The magnetic fields in the road might also pose a health hazard, especially in "sports cars" where the people ride low to the ground. Also note that a breakdown in the system would leave thousands stranded, which could be deadly in extreme weather (when such a failure is likely). I would suggest some onboard backup system be available that could get cars home, possibly at reduced speeds, when this happens. StuRat 15:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
[97] sugests we consume about 14000 GW, or 1.4x1010 W. Solar constant says we get 1.740×1017 W. So we receive 10 million times what we need. DirkvdM 19:24, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
This looks familiar. See orders of magnitude (power) for more measures of power consumption. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 19:42, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, that confirms the power recieved form the Sun (under Petawatt) but states that the total power consumption is a factor 1000 higher, namely 1.4x1013 W (under Terawatt) (a quarter of which in the US?!). So what we recieve is still 10 000 times more than the consumption, but I want to get this right. What would be a good source for this sort of info? (outside Wikipedia I mean :) ) DirkvdM 10:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
The World Energy Council says we consumed about 12 TW in 2001, compared to about 26 PW received in solar radiation over the Earth's land surface (and therefore about 78 PW over the whole globe). This is a ratio of about 6,000:1. These are my conversions from their figures which are in toe (tonnes oil equivalent). And yes, the US is responsible for a quarter of global consumption. (Only a quarter? Call yourselves a hyperpower?) --Heron 13:29, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Ok, so if the US wanted to independently produce all it's power with solar cells, that would mean we would need 1/4 of 1/6000 of the Earth covered with solar cells, or 1/24000 of the total surface area of 510 million square km, which is 21,250 square km, or an area 146 km by 146 km. However, this is assuming 100% efficiency in conversion and transmission, which is way beyond current capabilities. If we assume 10% efficiency, we get an area 461 km by 461 km. I suppose it might be doable, but building it would have to be one of the largest projects ever undertaken on the planet. Making it a floating array in the Caribbean would have the advantage of reducing the solar heating there, and would thus reduce hurricanes. Then again, they would need to be very durable cells to survive long there. StuRat 19:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Looking at hypertextbook's page, I'm impressed that China could function on only 7.19 W throughout 1980. I wonder what happened to their efficiency, that's better than the RDA for 30 people. It's also interesting there's been no population growth since then. Are you sure that was your source? I don't see how you'd get 1.4x1010 W from that page.
According to the Energy Information Administration, the world's total energy consumption in 2004 was 420.98 quadrillion Btu (nice, sensible units), an average of 1.4075×1013 W throughout the year. The United States used a bit less than a quarter of that (3.287×1012 W). [98] In case you're curious, China's average power consumption in 1980 was actually 577.96×109 W. [99] ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 14:17, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
My calculation: from the page I concluded about 2000 GW for China, it says China use around 13% of the world's power, so I multiplied the 2000 GW by 7 and got 14000 GW or 1.4x1010 W. An extremely rough calculation, but that can't be off by a factor 1000. I suppose the site said GW where it should have said TW. DirkvdM 18:31, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I see. Um... 14,000 GW is 1.4×1013 W. ^^;
‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 19:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh dear, I used 106 for Giga. Twice! I must be going soft in the head. DirkvdM 12:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Linux iwconfig

OK, I'm a newcomer to Linux, so try to ignore the stupidity of my questions and to try to give a simple answer. ;)

I'm trying to connect Knoppix on a LiveCD to my wireless router. I've used ndiswrapper to successfully install the Windows drivers for my Netgear WG511v2 PCMCIA wireless adapter card, and modprobed it so it shows up in iwconfig as wlan0. I can use it to scan for wireless networks and I do find my own wireless network in the list. It is WEP-encrypted, and I'm having trouble connecting it. At first, when I execute configuring commands like iwconfig wlan0 essid "SpeedStream9197", the settings in iwconfig are recorded. But as I start to put in more settings, I start losing the old ones, and eventually I find myself unable to set anything in iwconfig anymore. Any suggestions to what is going on, or have I missed something incredibly simple? -- Daverocks (talk) 11:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Knoppix has a "networking" control panel which takes care of most of it for you, and it wouldn't surprise me if some of your problems are that you're "undermining" the control panel's work with your attempts at specifying things manually.
When you have multiple networks available to you, listing them and/or specifying which one you want to use under Linux is tricky. Using the essid subfunction of the iwconfig command, as you suggest, seems to help, but you have to do it at the right time. For example, I think I remember going through a routine where I'd type the iwconfig essid command in one window but not hit RETURN, then go to the Knoppix networking control panel and configure everything else and click "Enable", then quick go back to the terminal window and hit RETURN so the iwconfig command would take effect during the control panel's autonegotiation attempts, and then everything would work. Steve Summit (talk) 14:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Would kwifimanager be this "control panel"? I tried running that, and it told me it couldn't start some service, and therefore it couldn't work properly? I'm going to have to check what it says again to give you a more detailed error message. But the GUI for it came up anyway, although it did not do anything because of the problem. -- Daverocks (talk) 19:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I dunno. Maybe. I always got to it the WIMPy way, by clicking on "Networking" in a "System Configuration" menu somewhere. Steve Summit (talk) 20:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I found a better way to configure it; wlcardconfig. You enter in everything and it does all the commands for you. Everything is set properly except the essid configuration. That's the only thing that doesn't save. I also found a GUI that has configuration options, probably similar or identical to the one you mention. Again, doesn't seem to have any effect on setting the essid. Do you remember exactly how you did that essid trick? I would be very happy to know. -- Daverocks (talk) 21:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Solved the problem! I was setting the WEP key in restricted mode (its default) which might have something to do with stopping me from choosing a specific access point (?) Anwyay, I just put it on "Open" mode and it all works! GO LINUX! :) -- Daverocks (talk) 09:31, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Converting .wma to .mp3

I borrowed some Music CD's from a friend and copied their contents on to my hard-disk.Coz I used Windows Media Player,the tracks are in the .wma format.I need to convert them to the mp3 format.How can I do that?Those CD's are not available now so I cant rip them directly.Some help required. Thnx in advance.

Well, you could decode them to an intermediate format such as uncompressed wav, then re-encode them to MP3, however, as both WMA and MP3 are lossy formats - that is, they degrade sound quality as part of their means of making the files smaller - your files will suffer quality loss from both the WMA encoding and then the MP3 encoding, and will most likely sound abysmal. As for which software to use, many open source and freeware audio players have the ability to convert audio formats to wav - off the top of my head, I believe Winamp can both play WMA and convert it to wav, and CDex can encode wav to MP3 --Noodhoog 13:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Thnx for the reply but it doesn't help me because Winamp can only convert to .wav from CD's directly.Just like Music Match JukeBox,which can rip only CD's,not tracks from the hard-drive. Thus this isn't a solution. Thnx anyway.
[100] It's for an older version, but the instructions are similar for version 5. enochlau (talk) 17:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Under the Microsoft EAUL license, which you accepted (because you use Windows Media Player) you cannot—repeat cannot—change a .wma file to a .mp3 file. You can convert a mp3 file to a wma file, but not the other way around. KILO-LIMA 15:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
    • That's funny, I can't seem to find the EULA for WMP 10. Do you know where I can get a hold of it? enochlau (talk) 17:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

The fundamental problem is that WMA format is not designed to let you do what you want to do here. Moreover, it is specifically designed not to let you do what you want to do here. Microsoft doesn't want you converting those WMA files into any other format at all (let alone the popular but unprotected mp3 format), because in this case, it is more interested in keeping the record companies happy than it is in keeping you happy.

  • Um, you know you can tell media player to save the files it copies as high quality mp3 files, negating the need to convert them--64.12.116.74 22:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

There are probably programs out there that can convert from WMA to mp3, but they are not going to be easy to find, because if they were easy to find, Microsoft would have found them and gotten them suppressed under the DMCA. There are probably people (here) who could tell you about those programs, but they're reluctant to, because telling people how to defeat copy protection can get you in almost as much trouble as defeating copy protection, which can get you in almost as much trouble (more trouble, really) than actually violating copyright.

Steve Summit (talk) 16:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Why so hush hush? dBpowerAMP has always done the trick for me. Of course, if the content is protected by DRM, nothing's going to conver them, but if they're unprotected, this should do. enochlau (talk) 17:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Well since you ripped them yourself using WMP, then there should be no protection actually (unless you chose to apply it yourself, and then you only have yourself to blame!) enochlau (talk) 17:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I use GoldWave to open WMA files and save them as WAV. Then it's just convert to MP3. It's not very wise, but I don't really have WMAs of files I want in high quality, so to hell with quality when I do this. WMA sucks. ☢ Ò ieff⌇↯ 18:45, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
A quick and easy (though somewhat unrefined and inefficient) method is to get WMP to burn the files to disc, if that's possible, and then rip the CDs with another program that makes MP3s. Sum0 22:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Um, you know you can tell media player to save the files it copies as high quality mp3 files, negating the need to convert them--64.12.116.74 22:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
    • S/he's already converted them, and presumably doesn't have the original CD? But even if so, it's a good question. Don't put people off like that. enochlau (talk) 22:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
      • I didn't really think I was putting anyone off, it's just all the responses so far seem to imply that microsoft doesn't let you copy content in mp3, when that is actually a false statement--64.12.116.74 22:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
        • Oh right, fair enough. I guess it's something s/he can remember to do for next time ;) enochlau (talk) 22:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

You're spot on there,enochlau.That's exactly my situation and that's exactly what I'm not going to do in the future.

[edit] carcinogens

What common foods contain carcinogens ? ie: tea , coffee, bacon etc

I believe when you burn foods you create carcinogens (I mean burn as in fire, not as is metabolize). StuRat 14:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Well-done steak (which I like) is known to be much more likely to give one cancer than medium steak. With my luck, however, I'd be suprised to live long enough to get cancer. Captain Jackson 15:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Answer here. (Also here, here, and here.) Steve Summit (talk) 16:36, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I read somewhere that table salt caused stomach cancer, but that made no sense to me. Your body is full of sodium and chloride ions. —Keenan Pepper 18:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I hadn't heard that. Iodine is also added to table salt to prevent goiters, but that isn't carcinogenic either, as far as I know. StuRat 20:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Researchers in Japan [101] and Poland [102] have linked table salt to stomach cancer. According to the American Cancer Society:
There is some evidence that diets containing large amounts of food preserved by salting and pickling are related to increased risk of cancers of the stomach, nose, and throat. Little evidence suggests that moderate amounts of salt or salt-preserved foods in the diet affect cancer risk. [103]
‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 20:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I smell a (horrendously large) List of suspected carcinogens article coming on... --PeruvianLlama(spit) 04:02, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
We already have those! See List of IARC Group 2A carcinogens and List of IARC Group 2B carcinogens. ^_^
‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 06:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Many years ago, a magazine ran a competition for spurious scientific principles. My favourite was "if a rat is experimented upon, it will develop cancer". Notinasnaid 08:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
The answer would be: most of them. Even without eating carcinogens, you'll still develop cancer now and then. It's normal to get cancer a few times a day. The vast majority of the time your immune system will take care of it. Now the relevant question is: How many common food products contain carcinogens to the extent that they significantly increase the risk of cancer? Now that is a hard question to answer, but in most cases you can rest assured that the risk is not great. The greater the risk, the easier it is to discern from statistical error. --BluePlatypus 17:50, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Counter-Strike and Weapons Copyrights

The computer-game Counter-Strike:Source contains a variety of computer models of real weapons. All of the weapons except the Mac-60 have fake names in the actual game because of copyright restrictions. However, if you go to the console screen it says that player X killed player Y using the real name of the weapon. Why do they have sneak around with the naming in the main game, but not the console? Plus they do alter a lot of the weapons' accuracy and damage abilities, making them less realistic, so why is it ok to use the weapon but not the name? Captain Jackson 15:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Back when Counter-Strike was a free, user-made mod of Half-Life 1, it used the real names of weapons both on screen and in the console. Technically speaking, this was a breach of the trademarks on the names of the weapons, but a free mod was unlikely to catch the attention of the weapon manufacturers. After the mod was bought-out by Valve, the on-screen names changed to non-trademarked versions (since a real company with actual assets is more likely to be sued). Apparently, games such as Rainbow Six that use real weapon names actually have a licence agreement with, e.g., Heckler & Koch, to use the real names.
For some reason, Valve didn't bother changing the CS console messages, perhaps because that would have meant re-writing the code (the names are actually C++ functions in the source code, e.g. weapon_famas) and it would also have broken things like buy scripts that lots of people used. Perhaps Valve figured that changing the on-screen name was a sufficient change to avoid trademark trouble, even though the appearance and console names still matched.
The Source version of CS uses a similar weapon-naming scheme as the original CS. You can download a small file that tweaks the weapon names back to the original "real" names, should you want to. --Bob Mellish 16:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How do I create public read-only variables (properties) in a PHP class?

I know how to create a public variable that's readable and writeable both inside and outside the class (public $varName;), however I want it to be read-only from outside the class while still readable and writeable from inside the class, without having to write a wrapper function for each variable. I’m not sure if PHP can even do this, so if anyone has any idea other than a wrapper class, please post them.

I think you just have to make the variable private and write an accessor method. Alternatively you could make it public, and specify in the documentation of your class that changing it may cause undefined behavior. —Keenan Pepper 17:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Buying Electricity

Discussions about electric bills often come up where I work, and the issue of power factor relating to what you use and what you're billed for is often raised. Many suggest that the utility company charges for the uncorrected power you use, using peak current. This would mean that they are actually charging for KVA/H instead of KW/H, which would be deceptive at best. Does anyone know the metering method of typical house KW/H boxes that the util co's use to charge for power in the US? I didn't find much specific info in our Electricity Distribution category. --Jmeden2000 17:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Isn't the kilovolt-ampere-hour exactly the same unit as the kilowatt-hour? I don't understand what you mean by "charging for KVA/H instead of KW/H". —Keenan Pepper 17:50, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Incidentally, its quite different. This is why the issue is so often raised around my workplace, being a power systems company. See our article on Power factor for a detailed explanation. Essentially the issue is that in AC power supplies for modern things like TVs and computers, the draw from the line is non-sinusodial. Calculating the power based on peak amperage converted to RMS is inaccurate (resulting in a VA rating that is higher than W). Calculating power based on amperage at a higher resolution, ignoring the sine wave, results in a more accurate measure of consumption (meaning W reflects *actual* power usage over time). Power factor of devices is typically .7 (this is the defacto industry standard that my company uses), meaning that if you look at the metered VA draw it is 30% higher than the metered W. --Jmeden2000 18:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Not to stop anyone from pondering this... but I found a fairly good answer after more reading in the Electric Power category's article on Electricity meter (should that article be attached to Category:Electricity_distribution?), which explains that most common meters use a method that does not account for reactive power and hence would meter true wattage. Although, it's not terribly specific so if anyone has more info I would love to hear it. --Jmeden2000 18:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

My understanding is that for a power company to charge for KVA/H isn't really quite so evil. (Nor would I call it particularly deceptive, since everyone knows about it -- everyone who knows about power factor, that is.) True, you didn't get any useful work out of those off-phase amps, and the power company didn't have to pay for fuel to generate them, but they did have to pay for copper in the transmission system to carry them. Those off-phase amps contribute to the current load (i.e. take their share of a cable's current capacity or "ampacity") just as much as the real, work-performing amps do.
Now, my understanding was also that, traditionally, small residential users are typically billed for KW/H (i.e. "fairly" from the work/energy perspective), and that the power company "eats" the power factor losses, or pays out of its own pocket for capacitor banks at substations to correct for them. However, large, high-current industrial users are typically billed for KVA/H, which gives them an incentive to install their own capacitors (if necessary) to keep their power factor near 100%. (But it wouldn't surprise me if, over time, more and more customers, even individual residential customers, are being billed for KVA/H. I just checked, and my electric meter is very clearly labeled "Watthour meter" and its display as indicating "kilowatthours", and so is the new, fancy-schmancy, electronic electric meter my neighbor has. If I had a big inductive load I'd perform an empirical test, but I don't.) Steve Summit (talk) 19:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that, as long as all power companies do it the same way, it doesn't matter, since they charge whatever either competition or the state governments will let them get away with. For example, if a utility sells one billion tweebles of power each year and it costs them a billion dollars, the state government may allow them to charge $1.10 per tweeble for a fair profit of 10%. On the other hand, if they claim they sell two billion tweebles a year at a cost of a billion dollars, the state would allow them to charge $0.55 per tweeble for a fair profit of 10%. So, the cost to the consumers will be $1.1 billion, either way you do it. In areas where different power companies compete, the forces of competition would dictate a similar outcome. StuRat 19:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, it matters at least a little bit, because a KVA/H is not merely some constant fraction of a KWH. Consumers have some if not complete control over the power factor of their loads, and since low power factor loads are wasteful to the system, it's worthwhile to give people an economic incentive to raise their power factor. Steve Summit (talk) 23:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How to put out a fire

How do water and carbon dioxide put out fires, especially when their individual atomic components (hydrogen-great fire fuel, oxygen-essential for fire, carbon-will burn, such as coal) would each support a fire by themselves? I am aware this has something to do with electrons and oxidation/reducation. Captain Jackson 18:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, sounds a little like a homework question to me. =P Just keep in mind that a compound (NaCl is table salt) may share none of the properties of its component elements (Na bursts into flame on contact with water; Cl2 is a poisonous gas). —Keenan Pepper 18:02, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Exactly. If water tossed onto fire could burst into flame because of its hydrogen content, we would have to expect table salt to be terribly toxic due to its chlorine content. (Though wasn't someone just asking about NaCl as a suspected carcinogen? Also, thinking about water bursting into flame, I can't help but be reminded of Beaker's disastrous experience in Muppet Labs with "flammable water".)
In effect, the hydrogen in water is already "burned". You can pull the two components of water apart to create hydrogen and oxygen gas (in fact I think we were just talking about that here, too), but it takes exactly as much energy as you'd get back if you burned the hydrogen, so it doesn't tend to happen by itself.
With that said, though, I've heard that you can't put out an aluminum fire with water, and that aluminum will burn underwater, because it's so electronegative that it rips the oxygen out of the water itself, leaving hydrogen that will burn. (Come to think of it, the standard labratory demonstration of dropping lithium or sodium into water does the same thing.) Steve Summit (talk) 19:18, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Never heard of this happening with Aluminum, Magnesium will do this, though.
This is just out of curiosity, I'm a senior in college who will never take another science class as long as I live. I've actually completed an organic chemistry course. Captain Jackson 18:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe a better question would be how matter can put out fire, a form of energy. Captain Jackson 18:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, my apologies. Fire fighting has some useful information about this. The goals are simply to separate the fuel from the oxygen, and absorb heat. Water does both. It boils into water vapor which pushes the oxygen away, and it absorbs heat because of its heat capacity. Also see fire triangle. —Keenan Pepper 18:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Carbon dioxide is heavier than air, so sits on top of the fire, depriving it of free oxygen, and cools as it expands out of the extinguisher, then cools off the fire as well. Water evaporates as it hits the fire. If you've boiled water, you know how much energy it takes to boil it all off. And the main advantage of water is that it's so cheap you can pour huge quantities on the fire. Never use water on a grease fire or an electrical fire, though, as it will splatter flaming grease and conduct electricity. StuRat 19:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
It is true that CO2 is heavier than air, but that's not going to matter much with the fierce air currents that a fire makes. If you blow a stream of CO2 at a fire from an extinguisher, it's directed into a jet by the nozzle and it's its own momentum that keeps it moving toward the fire, just like when you play water on the fire from a hose. As stated above, its action is to cool the fire and deprive it of oxygen. --Anonymous, 09:50 UTC, January 28.

[edit] Mind and Brain

im doing a bit of coursework which includes a certain area of psychology and the mind, the question being, does the mind use the brain or does the brain use the mind? anyone who could answer would be great User:Alice cf83

From our article, the Mind: "The mind is the term most commonly used to describe the higher functions of the human brain"
To clarify this, the human brain is the physical organ contained within the skull with many functions, divided into "lower" and "higher" orders. The "lower" orders include involuntary activities, such as respiration, while the "higher" orders include mental activity, such as thought. As previously stated, the "mind" describes a collection of these "higher" functions. I would personally conclude therefore, that the mind uses the brain. For further reading, aside from our articles on the human brain and the mind, I would suggest this external link: Dualism: The Mind-Brain Problem. Hope this helps! --Lox (t,c) 22:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
We also have an article on the mind-body problem. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 06:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
I generally second Lox's answer. Suffice to say that you've asked an ancient and intractable problem of Western philosophy. There are people who are famous in no small part for their amusing ideas about this topic. --George 05:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, philosophy probably is relevant to this question, but strictly speaking psychology doesn't... do the mind-body problem, does it? --Sum0 10:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Does the book use the story it tells or does the story use the book it's in? Some claim there are no stupid questions. Such people obviously haven't studied philosophy. :) DirkvdM 14:10, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Nice analogy DirkvdM, I actually am an agnostic regarding that but I tend to think that it is most likely that the mind is a by-product of the brain, given that we have a bunch of data about the brain and it's functions that seem to point that way.--Cosmic girl 00:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] computer files

I was wondering why it's important to back up files? Thank you, Funk Posse

See backup. Gdr 22:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
My computer crashed last week (I'm currently using a loan machine). My last backup was in August. So everything I've done on the computer since then may have been lost: My diary, my writing, my financial records, my music, my art... next question, please? Grutness...wha? 22:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC) (still in shock)
I'd be happy to tell you why it's important, but unfortuately I stored that answer on my ZIP disk, which is now unreadable. So I don't know anymore. - Nunh-huh 22:41, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Lol, who still uses zip disks?--64.12.116.74 22:45, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
That's sort of the point. - Nunh-huh 08:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
What's a zip disk? Asking this makes me feel young for a change. :)
More seriously, especially make a point of regularly backing up texts you've written. I keep them together in a separate directory, which is very small because texts hardly take up any space. That way you can easily backup the whole lot regularly and have dozens of backups in the long run, without it really costing much. The chances of all backups of a file becoming unusable are then negligent. Unless you keep them all in the same room, which then burns down. So put them on some website as well. There are free ones for that, though I can't remember any right now. DirkvdM 14:16, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
It's important also to realise (and some people don't) that to be a backup there must be at least two copies. For instance, if you copy your photos to a CDROM from your hard drive, you have a backup. If you now remove them from the hard drive, you do not have a backup, even though the CDROM was originally a backup. On the other hand, if you made two CDROMs you do have a backup. This may not help if you keep them both together and the same disaster strikes. To plan backups you should consider all of the following possibilities: (a) computer failure loses files (hard disk wears out, nasty virus); (b) you, a friend or visting child deletes files, or destroys them (e.g. accidentally deleting a chapter of your novel without noticing, then saving); (c) computer is stolen; (d) computer is damaged by file, flood or other disaster. Remember that in cases (c) and (d) backups kept with or near the computer may be gone too (thieves tend to grab all sorts of stuff, and fire isn't picky). So called "backups" to files on the same disk are quick and easy, but only protect against case (b). Notinasnaid 17:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BitTorrent

Do torrents work at all from behind a router?--64.12.116.74 22:56, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I have a router and mine work fine. Perhaps you are thinking of a firewall. --Kainaw (talk) 23:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
If you are behind a home broadband router which is doing NAT, you may need to do some setup to direct incoming BitTorrent connections to the correct computer. How you'd do this depends on your router; for details of what ports you should open, Google is your friend. -- AJR | Talk 01:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
In fact, BitTorrent works fine behind a NAT without any setup; you'll just not be able to connect to other peers which are also behind a NAT or a firewall (this sometimes can be a problem on less popular torrents, and you will get slower downloads). --cesarb 02:52, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Depending on your specific situation, Port forwarding and Port triggering might also have relevant info. For a non-Wiki source, check out the BitTorrent.com FAQ. --PeruvianLlama(spit) 03:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] January 28

[edit] Early film technology questions

Hey, I'm working on a big table comparing film formats by specs and I'm still looking for a few pieces of information with little luck. Here are some:

  1. What are the projector aperture dimensions for Pathe Kok format?
  2. What is the pulldown for Cineorama (not Cinerama)?
  3. What are the gate aperture and projector aperture dimensions for Movietone?
  4. What is the first Movietone film with optical sound down the side?
  5. What is the first film shot in Academy ratio?
  6. What was the first film matted down to 1.75?
  7. What was the first film matted down to 1.85?

I may have more in the future, but that's plenty for now. Any answers with references most greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance. Girolamo Savonarola 01:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Perhaps you didn't realize this, but this is actually an on-line encyclopedia where you can answer most questions yourself using the handy search bar along the left side of your screen. Type in "film", press "Go", and marvel at the wonder that is modern technology. In your case, you will need to use the box with the "Go" button several times, for several key words, and also explore links you find on those articles to related articles.

Many articles are grouped into categories (see links at bottom of pages) You might like to explore some of the articles in categories such as the following.

User:AlMac|(talk) 08:23, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Re:5. According to this link Thomas Edison already shot his films in 1.37:1, but of course at the time it wasn't called Academy ratio. It was made into a standard by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences in 1932. David Sneek 09:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Just wanted to point out that User:Girolamo Savonarola is a major editor of Wikipedia's film technology articles. --Shantavira 18:13, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Shantavira for educating me. I found some sites via google which may be helpful.

There's also Yahoo but I think Teoma is good for general research that google might not be best for.

Lots more there User:AlMac|(talk) 01:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey all, thanks for the links! Unfortunately, couldn't find answers to those questions there. David, the 1.37 ratio didn't come about until 1931-1932 at AMPAS's instigation, so that site is wrong. Girolamo Savonarola 13:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] how do I become a reference desk volunteer?

I'm good with science in particular, but know a bit about a lot. I'd love to help answering people's questions.

Thank you, Jon Boro

Just like everything else on Wikipedia, just go in and do it! I love doing this now that I've found it! -- Mac Davis ☢ ญƛ. 09:10, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Note the "edit" button on the right of each heading. To answer that question, simply click "edit" and go nuts. - Akamad 09:33, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, be sure to put a colon before each response, and if it is a reply to a response, then put two colons. And link words you may want to with the great four brackets. [[]] -- Mac Davis ☢ ญƛ. 09:58, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Get an account too if you haven't already, and you can sign your contributions with ~~~~. For more info on contributing generally, see Wikipedia:Introduction. Enjoy! enochlau (talk)
Also, at the top of the screen there's some instructions for answering questions properly. Black Carrot 00:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dermathology,Biology and Chemistry question

Hi, I was wondering if the slime of a snail has good properties for the skin, because I don't know if buying a cream that 'everyone' here is buying because it's supposed to be so good, so I have my doubts, is it actually regenerative and all? or all they say is just part of the publicity.--Cosmic girl 14:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I, from personal experience, don't think it would be a good idea. What exactly do you want the slime to do to his/her/your skin? Age-reduction et al? A biologist and a dermatologist would have a much better answer than this. I suppose it doesn't really come under Chemistry. KILO-LIMA 16:16, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
If it is made from the slime of multiple snails, it might signal "lots of food this way." If made from the slime of one snail, it might prolaim to other snails that this one owns you. alteripse 16:44, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

LOL! very funny alteripse, well I don't think it's supposed to be for anything in particular, it's just said to be a good moisturizer since it's natural and it's supposed to improve the overall skin condition,no matter what you have or don't have...and well I saw an advertisement on tv and it's such a persistent advertisement that everyone where I live is aware of this product and so once I made fun of it with one of my nicknames on MSN and a guy friend of mine told me that his mom had bought him the cream and that it's actually good because he had a scar and it began to dissapear, but whatever, I'm such a skeptic that I want to know if that thing has chemical properties that could actually be beneficial for the skin or if it's just a fraud like a lot of stuff that's sold on tv.--Cosmic girl 16:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

What's the name of this product? I suggest you Google it and see whether there has been any tests or critical research. Lots of things are "natural", but that doesn't necessarily mean they're good for your skin, or anything else. --Shantavira 18:19, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Is this it? As so often happens, the write-up contains vague phrases like "laboratory studies have shown" without actually citing the studies. Your doctor should know whether this stuff is any good. Alternatively it looks as though you could just go find some snails to crawl on you. --Shantavira 18:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

hahaha! yeah I'd rather have snails crawl on me than use some dubious cream on my skin...I'll stay with my skepticism and not expose my skin to any risk.--Cosmic girl 19:40, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Are snails noted for having particularly lovely skin? I think not. Conversely, would one describe a flawless complexion as "peaches and slime"? And cow poo is "natural", but I won't knowingly be applying any to my epidermis... - Nunh-huh 20:37, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

hahaha! :D ( if I ever know of anyone who got results I'll tell you though ;) ) --Cosmic girl 23:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Ever hear of Penn and Teller's Bulls**t? They did that as a prank at the mall. M@$+@ Ju ~ ♠ 01:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
The snail-cream is vaguely reminiscent of "Slurm" cola, as well. - Nunh-huh 01:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
  • First, due to the obvious conflict of interest, any studies commissioned by the manufacturer are worthless, you need independent studies.
  • Second, the lack of any specific claim is suspicious. Quacks typically don't want to be pinned down to a specific claim, as that would make it easier to disprove. If it's only supposed to be a moisturizer, any plant oil will do that, and also reduce "the appearance" of scars by filling in the low spots, at least until it evaporates.
  • Finally, even if it was a valuable ingredient, cosmetics are notorious for angel dusting, which is adding a minuscule amount of good ingredients, which is insufficient to have any noticeable effect.

StuRat 06:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cotton swabs and ear damage

While the cotton swabs article doesn't mention it, the Q-tips article indicates that swabs should not be used to clean ear wax from a person's ear canal. Why is this? What is the possible damage that could result? -User:Lommer | talk 18:42, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Our article on earwax has an extensive section on the subject. It says:
It is generally advised not to use cotton swabs (Q-Tips or cotton buds) as these will likely push the wax further down the ear canal and, if used carelessly, perforate the eardrum or worse. Cotton swabs should be used only to clean the external ear.


That should answer your question. See the article for more info on cleaning the ear canal. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 18:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course, others say that these warnings are just a case of a manufacturer producing a product obviously designed for a specific purpose -- i.e. cleaning inside the ear canal -- and then attempting to avoiding lawsuit by claiming that it is intended for another purpose. Draw your own conclusions. --Anonymous, 20:40 UTC, January 28.
Yes, this is the case. The only reason to place cotton swabs on the end of a long stick is so they will fit in the ear canal. Plain cotton balls could be used for any other purpose. Since idiots who jam a Q-tip into their ear and puncture the eardrum could sue for millions, and possibly win, the manufacturers add such silly disclaimers in an attempt to reduce their liability. StuRat 05:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
If one can be sued for millions for producing something that people could misuse to damage their ears, then what sort of fines might weapons manufacturers face? Or do they also come with warnings that it may be dangerous to actually use them? Actually, I wouldn't be surprised. I suppose the preceding bit was about the US. My box of cotton buds says "don't stick into the ear too deep". What does it say in the US?
By the way, I used to use them, but then I changed to using a strong shower ray (is 'ray' the right word here?) until we got a new shower head that isn't fit for that. And now I notice that after half a year of not clearing my ears they don't get dirty anymore. So I suppose it's an addiction. When you regularly remove the earwax the body compensates by making more of the stuff, etc. If you stop cleaning, the wax will stop 'overflowing'. DirkvdM 11:45, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
  • How is one supposed to clean one's ear, then? KILO-LIMA 22:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
That's what I want to know. I was 60% deaf for a month last year because of wax buildup and Q-tips certainly didn't help much. When I was younger I remember my doctor used to shine a light into my ear and the heat softened the earwax which would then simply drip out. I tried to follow his example by pouring hot water into my ear and it might have worked a little bit, at least at loosening the wax, but I don't think the water was hot enough. I'm not suggesting you do the same thing either : ). freshgavin TALK 01:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
    • You will find you'll have more success by using luke warm salt water. Keep adding salt to a beaker of cold water until it doesn't all dissolve, stirring all the time, add hot water slowly whilst stirring until the salt has all dissolved. Pour a bit in your ear, until you feel it has filled up (may need to wiggle your head around to get it in there. Leave it in there for a couple of minute or so, with your heard tilted to stop it slopping out, then tilt your head back upwards (holding a tissue etc loosely to your ear to catch the salty, waxy, watery gunk. Proto t c 11:53, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Or use my shower method if you have the right head for it (showerhead, I mean :) ). Or maybe use a syringe. DirkvdM 12:10, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

You can buy ear wax solvents that are safe to put in your ears to dissolve wax (if you don't have holes in your ear drums, like tubes). Two US brands are Ceruminex and Debrox. alteripse 12:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

My brother-in-law always uses a low concentration of hydrogen peroxide. He swears by it. I'm not sure if this has any adverse effects, but he seems to be fine. My sister, on the other hand, always says to use an ear lavage kit or something like that. Good luck! --Dimblethum 03:25, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Battery Discharge

I need all the information I can get about battery discharge. I am participating in my local science fair and I need info to write the essay. I have been searching on the internet but all of the info is not quite right. I need to know about battery discharge in AA Alkaline batteries. Just the common household ones like Duracell and Energizer. I really Appreciate it, Thanks!

I once looked all this up to compare rechargeables, and see if Alkaline recharging really worked. There's a lot of information from the battery companies. If you are going to be successful in a science fair, you're going to have to become a pro at Google. --Zeizmic 20:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but I have already searched exstensively there, and have not found the info I was looking for. I need to answer a few questions: What is battery discharge? WHat does storing a battery in a cold temperature do? What does storing a battery at room temperature do? and What is the best way to store a battery? If you could answer these questions that would be great. Thanks! P.S.: I am looking for answers about non-rechargable batteries

Those are decent questions. They all boil down to one question though: What causes batteries to self-discharge? We should really have an article on self-discharging. -- Ec5618 21:24, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but my questions still haven't been answered. I would appreciate an answer, Thanks! Helen

Again, Google Aptitude is important. You should be able to find this [[104]] in 2 minutes. It answers all your questions. --Zeizmic 22:29, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, but it did not answer my questions. I am not looking for the numbers, but rather the basic information so I can do the experiment myself. Helen

These might be difficult experiments to do yourself. What you need is a way to measure total energy across a resistor at different discharge rates. Basically, an alkaline cell delivers it's maximum total energy at low discharge rates, such as a digital clock. You do bad things to the electrodes at high rates. Alkalines are fairly good at lower temps. You could run different motor loads (a bunny rabbit!) and see how long it takes to run down. You would need a multi-meter to measure voltage and current. Again, you would see a better total output at lower rates. You might want to compare it to carbon-cell (cheap) batteries. --Zeizmic 00:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BC pot laced with meth

I've tried going to UBC's web site to locate Dr. Bill MacEwen's statement that BC pot is laced with meth to get people addicted to pot. Nothing seems available. Can you suggest a starting point? Thanks, 198.166.18.60 21:59, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I doubt that the Union Bank of California is likely to know much about methyl alcohol in cookware from Ensenada. How about giving a little more context? --Trovatore 22:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

University of British Columbia Canada. Crystal methamphetimine laced marijuana to make people more addicted to cannabis. First read about Dr. B. MacEwen at UBC in local newspaper. 198.166.18.60 22:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Doesn't make a lot of sense -- it perhaps might get people addicted to meth, but who in the hell wants speedy pot? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 22:59, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to be much in the general Internet. You should read Methamphetamine which gives a lot of info. There may have been some confusion with Bush linking meth with cannabis, but they do silly things. Cannabis is usually shipped as an unlabelled commodity, there would be no economic advantage in lacing it at double the price. There might be a market for 'methed pot', but that would be impossible to label with a brand name. --Zeizmic 00:28, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Do you think it is possible? Someone once told me that meth turns to a liquid when heated. Would it not make the pot difficult to light or keep lit? 198.166.18.60 00:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Serious mistake in the question. The purpose might be to get people addicted to methamphetamine, not the weed. And weed isn't addictive anyway. So maybe that's what you meant; Get people addicted to the meth in that specific weed from that specific supplier. So that he can then start to sell meth once they're hooked. If I understand Zeizmic correctly and the price of meth is double that of weed, then that is the only thing that would make sense. Then again, this would only work for people who have never used weed before (so a very, very small market) because others would notice immediately.
In general it is safer to mistrust anything that is said about certain subjects that have strongly opposing camps. These camps often dominate discussions so much that rational statements simply get swamped. Or rather the media pick out the most 'exciting' stories, which are generally the least correct ones. DirkvdM 11:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Methamphetamines are considerably more expensive than marijuana is, and you'd have to do it pretty regularly to get "addicted" (it isn't a one-shot thing). As for what happens to methamphetamines when heated, methamphetamine (as sold on the streets) has a very low boiling point, low enough that it turns into a liquid and then a gas pretty quickly when heated with a flame. It would not pose a problem in keeping the marijuana lit, I don't think. But it would still be a stupid economic move. Additionally it would be a major undercutting of trust between the dealer and the buyer, which is generally bad for repeat business. Also, if the pot was laced with enough methamphetamines to get someone "addicted", it would be highly noticeable both in the pot itself and in the effects, which are completely different from that of pot. --Fastfission 03:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
No addiction is ever a 'one shot thing' (by definition even I'd say). Just one more of those bits of nonsense that are spread around by sensationalists. DirkvdM 12:13, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eyesight Damage From Optical Mice Light?

Is it possible? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.27.185.151 (talk • contribs) .

I'm not sure why you'd think it might. It may be red, but it's a light-emitting diode, not a laser. - Nunh-huh 23:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Some optical mice do use laser LEDs. I'd expect them to be class I, however (see laser safety). --cesarb 23:20, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
My own Logitech MX1000 Laser mouse is indeed a class I device. --GraemeL (talk) 23:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
It would probably be very hard to damage your eyesight by holding the bottom of a mouse over your eye. You would probably have more success holding a live mouse's back end over your eye.
As far as I know, most optical mice work by using red LEDs, as opposed to lasers. But if the light bothers you, I have heard of some optical mice that use infrared light so humans can't see it. -- Daverocks (talk) 06:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, but couldn't infrared light still damage the eye? Sum0 23:01, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I heard that ultrared and infraviolet light can damage your eyes, too. KWH 05:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
All the more reason not to look into the Sun, which emits large amounts of infrared and ultraviolet light. The Sun would be far, far more likely to damage your eyes than an optical mouse. Mind you, the Sun powers those infrared optical mice nicely :) -- Daverocks (talk) 11:21, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How can I free up RAM?

What are some ways that I can free up some of my computer's RAM? I'm running a Dell Dimension 4100 with a Pentium III, 128 MB of RAM, and Windows ME. I'm trying to improve performance, because as it stands, I only have a tiny fraction of my RAM available... Javguerre

As I understand it, Windows views unused physical memory as a wasted resource, and will deliberately grab it, to reduce disk swapping. If you try to keep Windows from doing this, you'll probably worsen overall performance rather than improve it. If you're interested in the performance of one specific program, that's different: Then you could try rewriting it to manage its own memory allocation, and there's even an API call to lock pages in memory so they won't be swapped to disk. --Trovatore 23:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
No, I'm interested in doing whatever I can to better overall performance. I know defragmenting will help, but I'm curious as to whether or not there's anything else that can be done. Javguerre 23:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, you could always buy some more RAM and install it. --Robert Merkel 00:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Try to minimize how many things you run at once.
  • Reboot periodically, to deal with former programs which left chunks of memory reserved after they terminated. They shouldn't do this, but many programs seem to do so anyway.

StuRat 05:33, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if I misunderstand this, but I get a feeling that you've got a wrong notion of what RAM is. It's a form of volatile memory. You can't defragment it. Each time you start the computer, it's initially all free. Programs then start using any still free memory. In my experience the only program that causes performance loss is Photoshop (or any other graphical application) when it's got several really big images open. Then again, I have 1 GB of RAM. And the reason for that is that (1) I use graphical stuff fairly often and that needs is (2) much RAM is one of the best ways to increase performance of a computer, unless it only uses very 'small footprint' programs and that is hardly ever the case anymore. Especially something monstrous like WinXP needs loads of RAM (at least a few hundred MB for it to feel comfortable). Linux, in contrast, was initially designed to work on very small systems. At today's prices it's also the most cost-efficient way to improve performance. Except of course for defragging, whcih costs nothing. But that is only needed for certain file systems andm where msWindows is concerned, FAT needs it more than NTFS. And Linux's journaling file systems don't need defragging at all because there is no fragmenting, to put it simply. DirkvdM 12:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


Do you have to use windows ME? Some linux distributions are designed to run on systems with only a small amount of memory. Damn small linux for example is available as a live cd so you can try it out without affecting your windows system. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 17:26, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Rambooster. chocolateboy 22:32, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
First, you should probably do a thorough scan for adware and spyware, using free programs such as AdAware and Spybot. Evil malware may be running on your system and stealing precious RAM. After making sure that's been taken care of, you can run MSCONFIG to see what other processes may be running at startup, and eliminate thost that you don't really need. There is a decent write-up on using MSCONFIG here: http://netsquirrel.com/msconfig/. And yes, RAM is relatively cheap, so putting in whatever the max is for your Dell can't hurt. LarryMac 16:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] End of math

Has all the <math> markup on this page overloaded Mediawiki? In the above section I see what must be uniquely generated strings that aren't being replaced, such as "UNIQ319e40072d2f771e-math95ccddc359b6a170000000B". ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 23:53, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Apparently it's stopped now. How strange. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 23:59, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Take a look at Wikipedia_talk:Reference desk#Gobbledegook in Instructions. Black Carrot 00:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Picture of insect

What insect is this?: http://img52.imageshack.us/my.php?image=clipboard016op.jpg --172.160.178.216 04:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

It looks like a grasshopper. -- Ec5618 23:51, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
No, I think it's something else. Black Carrot 00:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
May I ask, in what country was this picture taken? It still looks like a grasshopper to me. -- Ec5618 00:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Not a grasshopper, closer to a giant tropical cockroach. Probably taken in a warm place. --Zeizmic 00:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I've seen one those on one or more occasions where I live, which is in the southeast US. --Shanedidona 01:28, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

It looks to me like a katydid. --Kainaw (talk) 01:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, katydid [105] --Zeizmic 02:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

What did Katy do? DirkvdM 12:28, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

You all are missing the point ... katydid is a subgroup of grasshopper, so you're all right. --Cyde Weys 22:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

This is me (the asker of the question) thanks. BTW, it was taken in southern ontario. --172.160.178.216 04:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 29

[edit] Attention span

How does average attention span vary by age, and to what extent does it depend on context and mode of attention? I find that the 3M Meeting Network has measured the average attention span of adult audiences to be 18 minutes, [106] but Google returns very little about how attention spans are measured. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 02:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I recall reading an article on this, but, unfortunately, I lost interest midway through ... :-) But seriously, the attention span isn't a fixed thing, but depends on how much the topic interests you, how well the material is presented, the presence of visual aides, etc. The fact that different people have a different attention span for different things makes it quite difficult to quantify. For example, most people would find the movie, The Ten Commandments, interesting all the way through, but would have their eyes glaze over after reading a few minutes of the "begats" in the Bible. A few people, however, might be just the reverse. Those people might be inspired by the "begats" to create a biblical genealogy chart. StuRat 05:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Certain chemicals into your brain can help, such as caffeen. It helps if you are wide awake, interested in the topic, and have no great urgency to be somewhere else, such as running errands, or running to the bathroom. User:AlMac|(talk) 08:44, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] operating system

How do I install dual operating systems on my computer? I already have Windows XP but I also need Windows 98. Please explain in detail.

You'll probably need either two different disks or two partitions on the same disk. It's possible to repartition your disk while preserving the data on it, but it's very easy to screw up and lose all your data if you don't know what you're doing.
Once you have the multiple disks or partitions set up, the Windows installation CD should give you a choice of which one to install to. —Keenan Pepper 03:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this is still the case with WinXP, but in order to install older versions of msWindows, you had to protect the already present installation to keep it from being overwritten and the only way to do that is to disconnect that drive. So you'd need two drives. That is also why it is always better to install msWindows before Linux because Linux can handle that (it leaves the old installation alone unless you tell it otherwise). Or is that different with XP? DirkvdM 12:33, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
There are a couple of difficulties with installing Windows 98 after Windows XP. Windows 98 will need to be installed on the first partition of the drive, which is typically taken by Windows XP. So unless you do some trickery with the partitioning (note that you can't partition during Win98 setup like you can with WinXP), that's not going to work. I've tried installing 98 then XP, and that'll work just fine. enochlau (talk) 13:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, so ms has solved that problem with XP? DirkvdM 18:33, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity - why do you need Window 98? XP has a "compatibility mode" so you can run older programs on it and make them think they're running under (for instance) Windows 98. Right-click on the shortcut and select "Windows 98 compatibility".
Other than running older programs, I can't think of a good reason to have both WIndos 98 and Windows XP running on the same machine (and, as the comments above indicate, it's likely to be rather tricky to set up). If you really need to have both, you can always buy a very cheap older computer (compared to today's machines, you don't need much to run Windows 98) and install 98 on it... Either way, good luck! — QuantumEleven | (talk) 09:32, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Compatibility mode is good but not always effective. For example, PageMaker 6.5 doesn't run perfectly in Windows XP, and compatibility mode doesn't fix it; I believe this is partly due to changes in the behaviour of the PostScript printer driver, which is still the same. One more possibility for the original poster: buy Virtual PC or VMWare, which allow you to run a "system within a system", boot Windows 98 there. Notinasnaid 10:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] upload

Is there a way to store important files in the Internet by uploading them just like we download from the Internet? If yes please explain how to do this in detail. Also tell me what amount of data I will be able to upload.

Uploading and downloading both refer to file transfer, just different directions. If you're uploading something to someone then they're downloading it from you. It's just like emigration and immigration.
How much data just depends on how much storage is on the machine you want to upload to. Many sites will allow you to upload things via FTP and they'll usually give you a disk quota which says how much space you're allowed to use. —Keenan Pepper 03:05, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
There are methods you can find to use a Google email account for free storage of files. It doesn't have to be difficult though. Just email the files you need as an attachment to your gmail account. --Kainaw (talk) 03:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Ask your Internet service provider if they provide you with webspace. Most ISPs give you some webspace which you can upload to with FTP (mine offers me 10 MB of space to store data). -- Daverocks (talk) 07:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] penis?

Any thoughts? normal part of the body? or satanic imagery that must never see the light of day?--—The preceding signed comment was added by Bob Sagat (talk • contribs) {{SUBST:{2|}}}. 04:25, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Nice try - the reference desk is probably the one place on Wikipedia that is most immune to trolling :-) --HappyCamper 04:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
See our article on penis. Personally, along with wild geese that fly with the moon on their wings, penises are among my favorite things. That and whiskey. So I'm in favor. --George 04:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Bwahaha, that cheered me up. =) That's from My Favorite Things (song), right? —Keenan Pepper 07:34, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Let's see, how does that song go again ?
Raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens
Weiners that wiggle and dildos that come in...
Brown paper packages tied up with string
These are a few of my favorite things
StuRat 13:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Bimbos with breasts like two Rocks of Gibraltar
Priests who seduce me in front of the altar
Corsets that tie in the back with two strings
These are a few of my favorite things.
Women who yield up a plump Mount of Venus
Men who deliver a fifteen inch penis
Talk so explicit it virtually sings
These are a few of my favorite things.
When I'm horny
Needing porn, I
Have to scratch that itch....
I simply remember my favorite things
And then I don't need you, bitch.
Zotz 15:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


Nicely done ! Is that all you or did you find it somewhere ? StuRat 16:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, yes, that was me, with you as inspiration. In some way sadly, I suppose! - Zotz 00:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Proving once again that, truly, the pen is mightier than the sword. Steve Summit (talk) 05:03, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] *Drinks to counteract spicy foods?

I love spicy food, but like most people I sometimes bite off more than I can chew. I was curious if anyone knew the best drinks to have handy while eating spicy food. Water? Milk? I realize this may be a matter of personal preference, but I thought maybe there was a scientific reason one drink might be superior to another (pH?). EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 06:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Fresh tomato helps. The redder the better. Slice one up and have it handy. JackofOz 06:15, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I think milk is the best that would be readily at hand. But it seems it depends on what spicy food you are eating, try different drinks to see which works best for you with what food. This link [107] tells a few answers to why. Also, see what Wikipedia says under "Food" at Capsaicin -- Mac Davis ☢ ญƛ. 06:30, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
See Capsaicin. -- Rick Block (talk) 06:25, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Make up some lassi, which is basically yoghurt and water mixed 50/50. You can also add sweetners or spices depending on your taste. --Shantavira 09:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Mmmmm... lassi! I agree. Cybergoth 17:12, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Lassi is the time tested companion of spicy foods! deeptrivia (talk) 01:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
A trick I learned from my mother is that when you've put too much spice in food is to add milk to it. Works quite well. I think it's something about the fat in the milk that envelops the spicy bits so they can't 'sting' anymore. Or something.... DirkvdM 12:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I find lemonade or orange juice to be good; anything with citrus fruits in. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 15:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree with those who said milk. Specifically, milk with a high fat content. The reason is that many of the chemicals in foods which cause chemical burns are oil-soluable instead of water-soluble. So, mixing them with water does not dilute them, you are left with small drops of oils containing high concentrations of these chemicals. If fats are consumed with the spicy food, then the chemicals can be diluted among all the fats. StuRat 15:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Fat-soluble, that's it! "envelops the spicy bits", oh dear me. Well, at least I sort of got the idea right. Next time I'll try to get the words sort of right too. DirkvdM 18:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone for their responses. :o) I'll be sure to consult this conversation the next time I'm trying a new hot sauce or pepper of unknown potency. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 01:11, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Differences in polymers

I am new to the industry and was wondering what the difference between polypropylene, polyethelene, and polystyrene? Also, what does it mean in low density and high density? Explain in regular terms please so I can understand this situation a little better.

Thank you

See polypropylene, polyethylene, and polystyrene. Polyethylene in particular has a good discussion of the different densities. Usually HDPE is a stiff material, used in milk jugs, and LDPE is a thin flexible film, used in plastic bags. —Keenan Pepper 07:40, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Polymers too. We have listed some terms which might be useful for you. To answer your question, the critical difference between a "low density" and "high density" polymer is the amount of branching that is present in the polymer chains. If the polymer chains have more branching, they can't line up quite so good, which lowers their overall density, and also their stiffness. The terms "low density" and "high density" are just general classes of names; there really is no strict cutoff which separates the two. --HappyCamper 17:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] RADAR building

hello sir i am studying in 10th grade and i wanted to make a aircraft detecting RADAR for my project work so please if you give me some information about RADAR like how to make i'll be glad so please try to help me or else i'll loose my marks

                    thanking u
Are you sure ? That's a fairly ambitious project, and yet, there is nothing novel about it. To me that means lots of work with little reward. But, if you are going to do RADAR, which type did you have in mind ?
  • Passive RADAR detects signals emitted or reflected off the plane from other sources. Apparently this can even be done with cell phone signals. This has the advantage of not requiring a transmitter, but only a receiver, on the ground. This makes the RADAR site more difficult to target in combat and also makes it easier to do as a project. The simplest version would be where the plane broadcasts a transponder signal at a given frequency. In this case, you would only need a model plane or helicopter with a transmitter and a receiver set for that frequency. Transponder signals also send other information, but you wouldn't need to read that for this project.
  • Active RADAR sends out radio waves and detects their return.
  • Doppler RADAR also records the speed at which the object is moving towards or away from the RADAR installation by detecting minute differences in the frequency of the returned signal, as predicted by the Doppler effect.
A typical RADAR would have a rotating parabolic radio antenna to provide 360 degree coverage, but I think a fixed RADAR would be a lot easier to implement. You'll have to build, or buy, some electronic components to take the signal and convert it to an oscilloscope signal, in any case. I suppose you could skip the oscilloscope and just light a bulb or sound a buzzer when the plane is in front of the RADAR, if you want to simplify the project further.
StuRat 16:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Radar sources are easy to find actually, just grab a magnetron from an old microwave oven. 82.26.171.28 20:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Attempting to operate a magnetron outside its designed cavity is VERY dangerous and will not only decrease its useful life, but will also pose a serious threat to the operator of the device. Microwaves can cause cataracts, deep thermal burns and internal burns. Any electronic equipment within range of the magnetron will be instantly destroyed. -- Mac Davis ☢ ญƛ. 04:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


You should be aware that there are laws about radio transmitters, and if your radar station is not in compliance, you could get in trouble. In the US, for example, the relevant government agency is the FCC. --Anonymous, 21:50 UTC, January 29.
There used to be a hobby called aircraft spotting, or something like that, which was like bird watching, except after 9/11, the authorities in many nations have become extremely suspicious of activities the participants thought were totally innocent. These people could be in cahoots with terrorists, helping plot how to bring a plane down. Other people get lasers for innocent purposes, but are outside waving them around, and not realize the beam goes all the way up into the sky to interfere with aircraft navigation. So you better check with law enforcement, or homeland defense, to make sure your plans are not going to send you to the prison where they put suspected terrorists. User:AlMac|(talk) 01:31, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] vicodin

Hi could someone tell me how long it takes vicodin to clear ones system , so it would not be detected in a urine test? Thanks Carl

Hmm. Well, the half-life of hydrocodone is four to eight hours, but the metabolites might be worth considering too. The maximum serum level following a 10 mg dose is reached after 1.3 ± 0.3 hours, with a mean peak concentration of 23.6 ± 5.2 ng/mL. [108] I'm not sure what the minimum detectable concentration would be, but .05 ng/mL seems like it might be reasonable. [109] Given that, it may take 36 to 72 hours for a 10 mg dose to become undetectable (probably longer; apparently 26% of the original dose can be found in urine after 72 hours [110]). Drinking fluids and taking diuretics such as caffeine or water pills will help (though the latter may cause dehydration or electrolyte imbalances).
As far as I can tell, Vicodin typically contains at least half a gram of acetaminophen regardless of the hydrocodone content, so taking it regularly or in large doses would be a very bad idea. Hydrocodone also causes physical dependence, but at least should be less destructive to health than alcohol or nicotine. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 16:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
...Accounting for a threefold increase in urine concentration extends the detection duration to 42-84 hours, but this doesn't seem right if 26% remains in urine after 72 hours. Does someone else know how this should be calculated? ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 17:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I think there is another way of understanding what the 72 hour urine sample means. The recovery of 26% [111] during 72 hours is part of the analysis of total drug disposition (e.g., about 26% is excreted unchanged in the urine as opposed to being metabolized to other substances in the body). It almost certainly does not mean "...leaving 74% of the drug to be excreted over the next few days."

Unfortunately that figure does not give us the info to answer the question, which appears to be "how many days after ingestion of some vicodin will it no longer be detectable by a standard commercial urine drug screen?" I do not know the answer, but it would almost certainly depend on the amount ingested in the 2-3 days prior to stopping. The best answer might be found by googling for websites that coach people on beating drug tests, or the commercial sites of companies that make drug screening tests for employers and law enforcement. This is not a topic I have expertise in so I don't know what is readily available online. alteripse 17:27, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Acorn Computers

My school has, in some of the older classrooms, strange black circular power/network/telephone/something sockets with the Acorn Computers logo printed on them. They look completely different to any plugs I've seen and no-one seems to be able to identify them. The article on Acorn doesn't help. Any ideas? smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 15:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Could they be Econet sockets? They were used for networking BBC micros and the like, and used what looked like a type of DIN connectors. --Bob Mellish 16:17, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
That looks right. I'm guessing the school never bothered removing them after they got rid of most of the Micros. Thanks! smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 16:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History on Stain Remover

Please help- I have looked everywhere. My 11 yr old son is doing a science project on stain removers and needs some history facts. He provided history facts on detergent to his teacher.. and she is requiring that he re-do the paper. He needs the history on Stain removers.. Who made it ? When was it invented/created? Why ? How.. details details :-) Please Please help. Thank You so much

This website might be of some help. David Sneek 19:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is making it too easy for kids to do elementary school science projects. Now they've gotta make up silly themes like 'stain remover' and RADAR. freshgavin TALK 01:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
(added "radar" wikilink to show what he's talking about, because I couldn't tell :p ) --AySz88^-^ 02:38, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discovery channel documentary

I once saw a documentary in the discovery channel about how we 'react half a second or more (I don't remember exaclty since it was long ago) BEFORE a stimulus is presented'...how can this be? is there any research about this?.--Cosmic girl 20:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure they were not talking about experiments that detect delay between the brain reacting to a stimulus and a person being conscious of the stimulus? --JWSchmidt 20:54, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
It is not abnormal for a person to expect and prepare for a stimulus. For example, dictating has always conflicted with science. According to science, a human can only dictate at something like 60 words/minute. There is a minium amount of time it takes for speach to hit the ear, get processed, and then tell the fingers which key to hit. But, humans use simple pattern matching to predict what is coming next and, usually, type things that are expected at the same time (or before) they are said. So, it is not truly reacting before a stimulus occurs, it is really reacting to a previous stimulus. --Kainaw (talk) 20:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I think what was meant was probably that we react before we are conscious of a stimulus. David 21:27, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

thank you :D --Cosmic girl 01:37, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't be thankful before you've had all the answers. :) I'm thinking of something related to the above, but somewhat different. Tests have shown that people start to act (on an impuls, possibly) before they are aware that they have reached a decision. It was something to do with pushing a button (or not) depending on some stimulus. I think that what was done was to measure a certain activity in the motoric parts of the brain, indicating that the test person was already getting ready to push the button. But somehow (I can't remember how now) the figured out that that happened before they were aware that they had already reached a decision. This fits in nicely with the view I have 'always' had that awareness is just the top level of the decision making processes that go on in the brain. These start at a very basic level, with most ideas that come up quickly dismissed for reasons of inconsistency with other views that are held by the brain (if I may put it that way - I mean the brain's 'world view'). Some, however, pass those tests and go on to the next level, where they are scrutinised (checked for consistency) in more detail. Etc, until finally there aren't too many inconsistencies and the top level is reached. This all happens very fast (split second), but the pointis that there are already fairly acceptable reasons for deciding before the final decision is made. And in a dangerous environment it can be a lifesaver to already start 'acting on an impuls' even before you're aware of what decision you'll reach. Computers do this too - the cpu anticipates waht will probably be the next move andstarts executing that. If it's right its won time. If it's wrong, it's as slow as it would have been without that process. Called 'piping', I believe. DirkvdM 12:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Superior Storage Medium

There's been a lot of hype concerning the whole future hydrogen society. But I was sort of wondering why I would be so great...

A vehicle needs X energy to travel from point A to point B. It's irrelevant whether this energy comes from oil, gas, ethanol or hydrogen - X remains constant. So, you can collect solar energy in mechanical solar cells and "store" it in hydrogen or you can collect solar energy in organic solar cells (crops) and "store" it in ethanol.

So the question is - if the basic principles are so similar - why would hydrogen be better than ethanol...?

Celcius 21:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Methanol economy has a short buillet-pointed list - while it's referring to methanol specifically, the same points are relevant to ethanol. For a more in-depth look, see Ethanol fuel and Hydrogen economy GeeJo (t) (c) • 22:44, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ultrasound

I'm going in for an ultrasound scan for a trivial problem soonish. Pregnant mothers can get photos of their baby, but as I am the curious and fascinated-by-grisly-things type, would I be likely to be able to get one of my internal organs? Sum0 23:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

You can always ask. I don't see why they would refuse you but you're going to be dissapointed. Ultrasounds don't look grisly they look crap. It takes a trained professional to see anything. All you will see are grey blobs. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 23:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Ask and they will probably be glad to print you a couple pics in a few seconds (very easy nowadays), but Theresa is right, the shadows of an ultrasound are unintelligible shadows of shadows. alteripse 00:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you could manage a much more grisly MRI scan. freshgavin TALK

[edit] getting off lithium

Has anyone to your knowledge been able to get o off lithium without going to other medication? My psychiatrist believes I was misdiagnosed my original diagnosis: Bi-polar. New diagnosis: PTSD. Any help would be appreciated! Thank you.

Lots of people have been on and off lithium or any other psychotropic drug. The problem with psychotropics is that there is no blood test that tells a psychiatrist exactly what disease a person with a mood problem has, and how much benefit can be expected from a given psychotropic drug. Therefore many people try more than one over a period of months or years before finding one that helps or finding other resolutions. Persevere and good luck. alteripse 00:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Remyelination

Hi i am wondering if there is a way for humans or even animals to be remyelinated after they have suffered from diseases such as ALD.

I know that Dr. Goldman at University of Rochester Medical Center has had some successful experiments with either mice or rats. Perhaps a Google search will turn up some research papers he has written. --Kainaw (talk) 00:29, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Have you seen the movie Lorenzo's Oil? In the end, the parents' next goal is to find a way to remyelinate their son who suffered from ALD. They talk about the case of the shaking puppies which were born without myelin. They were supposedly successfully remyelinated. You could check out this site: The Myelin Project Hope this helps! --Dimblethum 01:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 30

[edit] Sound card

Does anyone know if it's possible to fry a sound card or other computer audio equipment by connecting powerful speakers to the computer through the head phone jack? Mine seems to have stopped working after doing just that, and that might be worth including in the sound card article. --Spangineer (háblame) 03:04, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Electricity does not come from the speakers, how can the speakers fry the card? This is why people buy stereos, to amplify the signal to the speakers. -- Mac Davis ☢ ญƛ. 04:23, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
I fried one by plugging powered speakers into the microphone jack though... enochlau (talk) 04:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
normally there's optical isolation to prevent any such thing happening. deeptrivia (talk) 04:50, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
I believe you can also 'fry' an amplifier by connecting speakers to them with too low an electric resistance, forcing the amp to give off more power than it can handle. I'm no good at electricity stuff, but you might have a look at Loudspeaker#Electrical_characteristics_of_a_dynamic_loudspeaker and Amplifier#Output_range. DirkvdM 12:43, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Interesting... well, I guess maybe that's what happened to it... now I just need to find out how to install a new one =). Thanks for the help everyone. --Spangineer (háblame) 22:32, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ohio Lakes

Are there any natural lakes (not manmade) in Ohio besides Lake Erie?

24.26.169.175

It seems that there aren't very many, but at least a few, including Crystal Lake and Portage lakes, which were formed by Glaciers. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 05:52, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moon Idea

I got this idea to make a system to protect the earth from asteroids.

1)A giant pipe 30kms long, 500m wide with 60cm thick walls would be built out of some metal (steel)

2)It would be put into an isolated part of the southern ocean.

3)A giant empty spherical durable metal foil bag 1/4 the size of the moon would be loaded into the pipe.

4)Ocean water would be pumped into the bag (ocean wildlife issues would be taken care of beforehand)

5)When the bag is full it would be pushed with rockets higher so that the water would freeze

6)The new moon would be in earth's orbit until needed, then it would be blasted towards the asteroid to deflect it.

!!!!!!!!!The new moon could also just be to look nice!!!!!!!!!!

>>>How much do you reckon this would cost? (I'm planning to make this as a weekend project)

PROS: asteroid sheild, all the water taken off earth would expose extra land, the tube could be remelted and used.

CON: cost

--Anonymous~Thinker `.............................................................

I can't wait to get my hands on one of these! As they say, better safe than sorry when the next asteroid comes along to destroy the Earth ;) -- Daverocks (talk) 09:11, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Anyone have the figures for the volume of the Earth's oceans versus the volume of a moon sized sphere handy? Dismas|(talk) 09:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
  • For one, the ice moon would need to get out of the earth's atmosphere, which causes a lot of heat which in turn melts the ice. Then there's the problem we probably don't have enough water to make such a projectile (so it's hard if not impossible to handle environmental issues) and I'm pretty sure building a 30 km pipe of any material would need welds somewhere along the middle and is impossible to remain upright. A foil bag the size of a quarter of the moon is probably impossible to make as well. And I don't get the pros either. How would a big ice ball protect us from asteroids? What if it's in orbit on the other side of the earth when an asteroid comes calling? - Mgm|(talk) 10:01, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, the solution to the last problem is clearly to build more ice moons until the whole sky is covered with the things -- Ferkelparade π 10:11, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Does the Earth contain enough iron, accessible to current technology, to make this tube? It seems an awful lot! Notinasnaid 10:19, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Ok, math time! The volume of the pipe would be about 2.824 \times 10^7 m^3. Considering ferrite stainless steel (maybe not the best kind, but it must have good anti-corrosive properties) with a density of 8.060 \times 10^3 kg/m^3, you'll have a total mass of 2.276 \times 10^{11} kg. According to orders of magnitude (mass), that's between the mass of water stored in London storage reservoirs and the total mass of the human world population. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 10:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Now let's consider the artificial moon is a perfect sphere of the same radius of the caliber of the tube. That'd be a radius of 250m − 0.6m = 249.4m. The volume of a sphere is \frac{4 \pi r^3}{3}, se we have a volume of 6.498 \times 10^7 m^3. According to our article on sea water, the average density is 1.025 \times 10^3 kg/m^3. That means our water moon has a mass of 6.661 \times 10^{10} kg, a little more than the amount of concrete in the Three Gorges Dam, the world's largest concrete structure. According to our article on oceans, the total mass of the hydrosphere is about 1.4 \times 10^{21} kg. It wouldn't be all that much numerically, but that's a whole bloody lot anyway. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 10:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
To elaborate on your "Cons: Cost" list, some back-of-the-envelope estimates. An object a quarter the size of the Moon would have a volume of 5.49 x 10^18 m3, and if it's made of ice (approximate density 1000 kg/m3), that's about 5.5 x 10^21 kg. We don't have a rocket that can lift anything of that size into orbit all at once - the biggest rockets we have can launch about 120 tons to low Earth orbit. Assuming we could, though, let's take a very optimistic cost of $1000 (US) per kg (not entirely realistic, current costs run about $10000/kg, but this is economies of scale... :) ), launching your ice moon would cost around 5 yottadollars, which is 5 septillion dollars, or 5 trillion trillion dollars. Just some spare change, for a moon which will probably happen to be on the wrong side of the Earth when the asteroid hits, or, if it does manage to get in the way of the asteroid, be shattered into five sextillion tons of ice shards which will come raining down on Earth... — QuantumEleven | (talk) 10:59, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
I expect the ice shards will vaporize when hitting the atmosphere.
I wouldn't be too sure of that. Read Lucifer's Hammer, for example. Remember, water has a very high heat capacity. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 15:20, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
And vaporising or not makes no difference - you still have the same (enormous) amount of mass hitting the Earth, no matter what form it's in. — QuantumEleven | (talk) 16:23, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't a big Orion drive be able to handle something this size? Maybe several in a ring underneath the ice ball? ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 14:46, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
I suggest large asteroid(s) from the asteroid belt be 'boosted' using a robot probe of some kind. Put them into high orbit around the earth and have one of them smash into any meteor, deflecting it. It presumes we have are able to detect any collision course meteor in time to boost the defensive asteriod in time.
...Coming back to this, it looks like the ball could realistically be put into orbit using 3 to 14 billion kilograms of atomic bombs. If Nuclear pulse propulsion is correct about the theoretical maximum specific impulse, the reaction mass could be improved to 700 million kilograms. What's the cost of producing that much plutonium? ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 23:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Except, these figures are for the 500 meter ball, not the 500 mile ball. So the amount of plutonium will need to be about five billion times greater. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 23:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Here is what will happen if the ice ball gets knocked out of orbit. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 15:38, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Am I the only one who read this and though... So, we make rockets capable of moving a fake moon around to block an asteroid. Why not attach them to the real Moon and save the money. We can worry about replacing it after we use it. --Kainaw (talk) 20:13, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Wouldn't the tidal stress of having a second moon arbitrarily plopped into orbit like, rip apart the planet or something?--152.163.100.74 21:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I'm pretty sure Earth's tidal force would rip apart any object this size at sea level. I'm sort of curious what would happen to the ice ball assuming it could be constructed in the first place: would the center melt under the pressure; would the ball stretch vertically; would it start rolling west? ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 22:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

+(BTW, I'm the guy who made this question) The ice moon would be smaller and easier to move then the real moon. ALSO: the moon isn't meant to be a 'sheild' per se, it would simply be boosted with rockets towards the asteroid long before the asteroid would actually reach earth, to deflect it (the asteroid). I originally thought that the ice moon could be covered with giant screens on one side and solar cells on the other. The screens would play comercials 24/7. Or they could be used to display the current time (the time would change, and display the times of different time zones). +Now, the cost would be 5yottadollars...so how much money exists on all of earth at this time?

Well, the gross world product is $50.4 trillion, so the project will take a while. You can find other measures of world production at World economy. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 05:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
  1. i have tried to responsibly contribute to the Wiki article on Human extinction avoidance.
  2. I suggest you try to do likewise, and be careful not to focus on original research but instead focus on what the science experts have proposed, and what the pros and cons are about the practicality of the various strategies.

User:AlMac|(talk) 08:56, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

+Elaborating on what was said, the ice moon wouldn't be made, and then lifted. It would be filled while 30kms about earth, so it would just need to be boosted. Incase someone doesn't get it, I'm including a picture. Image:Earthplan.JPG

That's an even worse scenario. The amount of weight the tube would have to hold would be excessively large, not to mention the amazing pressure that'd build on the floor base. Additionally, the amount of energy to pump all that water 30 km high over a 500 m wide tube would be equally monstrous. The best idea would just create a stationary space station and drop a very, very long hose all the way down on the ocean. From there on you could just pump tiny amouts of water up, avoiding all this huge tube thing... ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 12:32, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Lol, the pipe would buckle right away! deeptrivia (talk) 14:19, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
An added pro would be: to adjust the sea level if(when?) the polar ice caps melt! If you are making a water sphere of that size it would undoubtedly lower the mean sea level significantly, which will be convenient for when the greenhouse gases caused by smelting all that iron for the giant pipe cause the ice caps to completely melt and the ocean temp to rise enough to expand the water noticeably. A good idea indeed! --66.195.232.121 19:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ZIP shell integration

Is there a reason why the ZIP archive format has become so widespread it's even being integrated into the shell of several modern OSs (Windows XP certainly has it, and according to ZIP (file format), so does KDE, Mac OS X, and others)? Versus, say, RAR or 7-zip? Is it due to licensing, or just historical reasons? (even if RAR often gives better compression ratios than ZIP)? — QuantumEleven | (talk) 10:32, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion: PKZIP was already doing well. WINZIP came along and provided for perhaps the first time a human understandable interface to a compression format. ZIP therefore came to dominate the PC arena. So this was the obvious choice for Windows to have shell support. You can argue that the other systems with shell support are simply keeping partity with Microsoft (since, even if they offered shell support for some OTHER format, not supporting ZIP would be a hole in a comparison chart). ZIP combines compression AND archiving, while many others have only done one, leading to more user confusion. SIT - directly comparable to ZIP - never seemed to get far outside Macintosh, not sure if this is due to secrets in the format; its inventors didn't help their case by introducing new versions of the SIT format which older software just ignored, typically with not even a message. Notinasnaid 12:10, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Additionally, the RAR format is heavly proprietary and full of restrictions. See the article for more info. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 15:56, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, everyone! — QuantumEleven | (talk) 09:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signal. noise

Is it possible to detect a signal with signal-to-noise ratio < 0 dB? (i.e. S < N after bandpass filtering) Ojw 10:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

As long as there is any signal at all, it's possible to get a message through with enough error correction. —Keenan Pepper 23:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
If you add error-correction, surely you wouldn't be able to detect the original signal because you don't have enough bandwidth left? Or to put it another way, the additional bandwidth for the error-correction codes will introduce additional noise into the system. (Also, some sources might be uncooperative enough to not send error-correcting codes, e.g. if it's a sensor rather than a communications link) Ojw 13:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
All right, first of all, are we talking about digital or analog signals? —Keenan Pepper 18:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I'll say analog (since I've discovered enough on Shannon–Hartley theorem to see what you mean about error-correction in low SNR conditions, though that needs to be easier to find from the SNR article)
As an example, I'm looking at the radar equation and wondering how small a returned signal can be before you start "detecting" every bit of background radiation. Ojw 23:16, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I should have mentioned Shannon's theorem. I don't know much about radar though, sorry. =/ —Keenan Pepper 03:57, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
If you keep pinging the radar in the same direction and average all the returns, the background noise will average to zero and the signal, assuming the target doesn't move, will eventually get bigger than the noise, no matter how weak each return is. There is nothing magical about a SNR of 0 dB. --Heron 20:39, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] about the spinal cord

please can anyone tell me why the spinal cord(not the spinal column) is only 42-45 cms in lenght?

i have a biology teacher who says that there is a particular reason.

any help would be greatly appreciated.

203.115.67.81 13:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

It's always hazardous to pose "why" questions about biological traits, but I suspect your teacher might be satisfied with the answer, "so there is plenty of room for it within the spinal canal". alteripse 15:40, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A question about CDMA2000

I read that CDMA2000, the technology used by Verizon, allows always-on Internet connectivity. Does that means that

  1. The number of hours a customer is connected to Internet does not matter and only the data transfered matters? or simply
  2. Imagine two users using Internet using CDMA2000 network and if one uses the net for 1 hour and nother uses Internet for 2 hours. But if both use only 20 MB data transtfer, does that mean that the cost to the Telecom operator will be the same irrespective of time used?
CDMA (you might also check howcdmaworks.com) allowing Internet connectivitity doesn't have a direct relationship to Verizon's pricing. As I recall, Verizon charges by bandwidth used. However, that's not the entire cost per se to Verizon; each currently active connection cuts the remaining available network capacity, which can lead to "no circuits available" messages and service cancellations by dissatisfied users, etc. However, just because one company charges a certain way doesn't mandate that all companies use the same pricing system. — Lomn Talk 15:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Direct X

I keep geting the error

c:\Documents and Settings\Gerard Foley\My Documents\Visual Studio Projects\Direct X\Main.cpp fatal error C1083: Cannot open include file: 'd3d9.h': No such file or directory

How do I fix this. I'm using VC++ .NET 2003, Win 32 Empty Project. Thanks, Gerard Foley 15:57, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Uh... Have you checked if the file exists? ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 21:19, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

It the direct 3D include file, it should be there right? You don't have to go looking for windows.h or string. I have the Direct X 9 SDK if that helps. Gerard Foley 00:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I checked and (tears of joy) there was no Gerard Foley viruses in My Documents. How do you do ? --DLL 11:21, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
So, did you add the folder containing the Direct X headers into the Visual Studio settings for where to search for headers? Or are you counting on installing the SDK copying this file into the system headers? Either way, the message is pretty unambiguous: it can't find the file, so see at least where it is, and where Visual Studio is looking for it. Notinasnaid 11:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bin or toilet?

In the month of January I find myself blowing my nose more often than I do the rest of the year put together. Question: Is it better for the environment to put my used tissue in the bin or in the toilet (flushing only when I would usually flush, of course)?

  • More likely the bin, I would say. It's really only toilet tissue that breaks up if you were to flush it. However, it would really all depend on the brand of tissue you use. For example, Greenpeace complained that Kleenex used natural forests' paper, so I would think they would take longer to decompose. Recycled tissue, on the other hand, has already been mashed to a pulp, so I would think that would take less time to decompose. I wonder if you recycle your hankie after you've blown your nose? Hmmm. KILO-LIMA 17:03, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
I understand from your question you use paper hankies. I assume cloth ones are more environmentally friendly because you can re-use them a zillion times. I'm just not sure, though, how bad the effect of washing is. Which of course also depends on how often you 'recycle' your hanky before you wash it. DirkvdM 18:01, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
If you put it in the bin, you will increase the trash that will be picked up and transported to your local waste facility. It will likely be taken to a landfill and dumped.
If you put it in the toilet, it will travel with the water to your local water sanitation facility, where it will be caught in the solid waste filter. From there, it will likely be sent to the local landfill and dumped.
So, the only real difference is how you want to get it to the landfill - by truck or through the sewage pipes. --Kainaw (talk) 20:07, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
If it goes in the bin, depending on how environmentally conscious one is, it might be inside a plastic bag, so even after it gets to the landfill it will be isolated from the surrounding environment for a long time (perhaps a very long time). Whereas if it goes down the toilet, once it gets to the landfill it is added to the existing soil and starts interacting with it immediately. JackofOz 21:43, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm wodering if we're tackling this question the right way. The question as posed has quite a number of variables, and we've been neglecting one of them. If the hanky is left in the bin, then the germs will still be in the household environment until the bin is emptied. A cloth handkerchief, while better environmentally than a paper hanky, will compound the problem, since you'll be carrying the germs in your pocket. Toilets usually contain anti-germ treatments in the "cistern blue" fresheners, so from that point of view at least toilet disposal has advantages. Grutness...wha? 02:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I know some cultures find it quite disgusting that westerners carry dirty hankies around in their pockets, but is there really a health problem? The most important thing to do is to catch the snot in stead of spraying it around. After that there is little to no risk of infection to anyone (certainly not to yourself because you already carry the germs in your hanky) unless people use hankies recently used by others. And even then I think the risk is minimal. And then only of disease that spread through the nose (ie through sneezing) and that's just the comon cold, right? (Right?) DirkvdM 10:40, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Omega block

Does wikipedia have any articles about omega blocks in meteorology? Do omega blocks have anything to do with global warming? 129.186.52.90 17:40, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe Wikipedia has anything about Omega Blocks (perhaps I should add some... :o) ). Omega blocks don't have anything to do with global warming. Omega blocks are large scale patterns in the pressure/geopotential height field that are nearly stationary and resemble the Greek letter omega. These blocks can remain in place for several days or even weeks, causing the areas effected by it to have the same kind of weather for an extended period of time (precipitation for some areas, clear skies for others). The typical pattern for this is low-high-low, arranged in the west-east direction. Good examples are shown at these three links: [112], [113], and [114]. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 19:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
P.S.- Omega blocks CAN be responsible for many of the same things that are typical of global warming. For example, in the first link above, you can see that the middle United States is getting hot temperatures; this is due to a relatively short-term weather pattern (the Omega block) and is not a long-time climate change (global warming). Also, one of the characteristics of global warming is increased severe weather; Omega blocks can also cause this by contributing to droughts or floods, but once again this is a relatively short time scale as compared to the long time scale of global warming/climate change. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 19:25, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Is Omega block always written with a capital 'O'? Why, if so? PS The link is there so you can start the article ; ) 129.186.52.90 20:46, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I think it's only typically capitalized because we typically capitalize the English versions of the Greek letters. Other than that, I don't think anyone would yell at you if you called it an "omega block." You might also be interested in a "Rex block," which is the other common type of block. This involves a high over a low. A (decent) example can be seen here: [115], but this can actually look much nicer, with a fully closed high over a fully closed low. Both the Rex and Omega block are stable patterns and can dictate the flow for a good period of time. Best of luck with future explorations! EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 22:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HTML/CSS layout

I'm trying to achieve what I thought would be a very straightforward effect -- a header with several items spaced evenly across the top of the page. It's trivial to do with tables, but I've spent the better part of a day struggling with a solution based on div elements and CSS, with no success.

In particular, I would like to set the widths of the items as percentages of the width of an enclosing div element. I thought that using percentages with the width attribute would do this, but the results I observe do not seem to follow this rule.

This is a stripped down version of the HTML:

<html>
  <head>
    <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="index.css">
  </head>
  <body>

    <!-- This works -->
    <table class="header">
      <tr>
        <td class="header_left">
          Logo
        </td>
        <td class="header_middle">
          Welcome to my site.
        </td>
        <td class="header_right">
          <a href="contactus">Contact us</a>
        </td>
      </tr>
    </div>

    <!-- This doesn't work -->
    <div class="header">
      <div class="header_left">
        Logo
      </div>
      <div class="header_middle">
        Welcome to my site.
      </div>
      <div class="header_right">
        <a href="contactus">Contact us</a>
      </div>
    </div>
  </body>
</html>

and the stylesheet:

body { background: gray; }
.header { background: white; width: 100%; }
.header_left, .header_middle, .header_right { display: table-cell; background: lightgray; text-align: center; }
.header_left { width: 25%; }
.header_middle { width: 50%; }
.header_right { width: 25%; }

I've tried many variations on this, with no luck. I've been testing with recent versions of Firefox and Opera, and would like the page to work in IE as well.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. 128.220.220.95 20:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

That's not how div's work. In order to make the display: table-cell; work, you'd have to set the first div (.header) as display: table-row;, and in order to make this work, you'd need another div with display: table;. An easier way is use float: left; instead of display: table-cell;. The rest you adjust with margins. Btw, you forgot to close the <table>. Edit: Took the liberty to reduce your CSS a bit to save space on the page. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 20:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Wonderful! I swear on my mother that I tried a million variations on using float: left before I even figured out that there was such a thing as display: table-cell, and nothing worked. Now that I try it with the stripped down stylesheet, it works like a charm. I'll have to go figure out what in my full stylesheet is interfering with this.
Thank you so much. 128.220.220.95 21:14, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
If I've told you once, I've told you a billion times, don't exaggerate. Yours hyperbolically JackofOz 11:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What is the wave/particle relation?

Does the wave/particle duality in quantum mechanics, mean charges (mass, electric, nuclear) traveling around in spacetime as a wave and interacting as point particles?

See Wave-particle duality. —Keenan Pepper 23:14, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
The answer "yes" to your question is a more correct answer than the answer "no" to your question. WAS 4.250 16:43, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] January 31

[edit] Flamethrower

Hey, i'm sure you all know that when you light spraypaint on fire it turns into a flamethrower. But I'm looking for something with a little more kick. Any Ideas?

Google is your friend. I suggest the following searches to get you started: "DIY flamethrower", "fire extinguishers", "burns treatment in YourLocation". -- AJR | Talk 00:53, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
This guy lit a barbecue with liquid oxygen. See if you can get your hands on some of that. —Keenan Pepper 01:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Ask these folks. I'm sure they'll have some suggestions. hydnjo talk 01:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

There are fairly powerful flamethrowers sold for home use (e.g. clearing brush). They run on propane, will shoot a flame up to six feet, and are perfectly legal throughout most of the U.S. They'll set you back $100–300, not including the propane, but they're safer and more reliable than most homemade incendiaries. —Charles P._(Mirv) 02:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

gasoline in a watergun should work. make sure the flame is a good distance away--de_matthew 05:22, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Science

Other than ice what solid can turn into a liquid and then a gas and then back?

I'm not sure I fully understand the question, but as far as I know, given the right circumstances (i.e. temperature, pressure, etc.), you can change the state of matter of most any substance. Dimblethum 01:12, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Some solids will go through a chemical reaction before turning into either a liquid or gas. So, they won't turn back into the same solid again. But, most solids can go through the three phases. --Kainaw (talk) 01:41, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Others sublime straight from solid to gas (dry ice, for instance). Perhaps the original questioner wanted to know what ones can in the range of temperatures we regard as "normal" - say from -50C to +50C (-58F to 122F) and at standard atmospheric pressure. There are a handful of fairly common chemical compounds that fall in that range, and - IIRC - one element comes fairly close (Bromine). You might like to check out phases of matter, boiling point, freezing point. We really should have a list of boiling points and freezing points of chemicals here somewhere, but such an article may not yet exist here. Grutness...wha? 02:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
As a simple example, wood would not turn to liquid, is would decompose. The same is true for many organic substances. We do have List of elements by boiling point, but nothing about compounds. -- Ec5618 10:47, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, what is dry ice ? I once found a pack, it read "just add water and stir" ... never tried. --DLL 11:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Dry ice = frozen carbondioxide. 62.119.184.141 13:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm...just curious, so what would happen if you heated wood to a very high temperature? This is assuming that there isn't oxygen available with which it would combust. Would it just decompose? --Dimblethum 23:56, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Windows Movie Editing Software

I have a Windows computer and i'm not about the spend hundreds of dollars on a Apple computer just for Final Cut Pro. Any Good Alternatives?

You can download Windows Movie Maker for free. It's a pretty small download too (11mb I think for version 2.0)--172.168.117.94 05:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Freshmeat has a number of non-linear video editors listed, all of which are free and some of which run on Windows. See http://freshmeat.net/browse/256/ -- AJR | Talk 00:30, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Terraformation

I wonder, what is the minimum time it would take to terraform a planet like Mars?A few hundered years?A few thousand years?Hundreds of thousands of years?(Let's suppose we spend a minimum of ten billion US dollars on the project every year.)

Media:User:Bowei

Terraforming the whole Mars would take thousands of years using the technology available now. Of course, better technology would be available in the future, and these could be added to help the project. ---- Bowlhover 02:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
See Terraforming#Mars. All we really have is speculation for now. I think the main issue will be thickening the atmosphere and getting the oxygen out of all that Martian dust. We'll also need water, which we might be able to get by guiding comets down to the surface, or from mining 1 Ceres. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 03:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Cost estimation is also made very difficult by the fact that technology will necessarily have advanced quite a lot by the time we can begin to seriously consider doing so. But it's very difficult to predict *what* technologies will have advanced. Will terawatt-sized fusion reactors be routine? Self-replicating nanobots? Artificial genes so we can custom engineer plants that can grow on the Martian surface? Artificially-intelligent robots that can operate with minimal supervision on complex tasks? Advanced propulsion systems such as Orion drives for pushing comet-sized chunks of matter round the solar system at will? Ultra-thin mirrors? What mix of these, and other technologies, available will determine the specific strategies used for terraforming, how much it might cost, and how long it might ultimately take. And, finally, keep in mind the possibility of "The Reds" - Martian environmental groups advocating keeping Mars in its present state.
If you're interested in this kind of thing, you might consider reading Robert Zubrin's The Case For Mars (though keep in mind that it is a forceful work of advocacy, not a disinterested examination of the facts) and the fictional but well thought out Mars Trilogy of Kim Stanley Robinson. --Robert Merkel 03:31, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
In [116], Robert M. Zubrin of Pioneer Astronautics and Christopher P. McKay of NASA's Ames Research Center suggest nuclear thermal propulsion to maneuver asteroids using volatile substances on the asteroids (such as ammonia) as fuel. With gravity assists, they estimate rockets would need to produce only 300 m/s of delta-v, with ten years of burn time for a ten billion tonne asteroid. As few as four of these could produce a significant greenhouse effect.
An alternative is to manufacture sulfur hexafluoride or perfluorocarbons. [117] According to Zubrin and McKay, this method would require about 2×1018 J and fifty years of patience.
The purpose of warming the planet is to release carbon dioxide from the ice caps and oxygen from peroxides in the regolith. Plants could eventually be grown in the warmer regions, increasing the concentration of oxygen in the atmosphere to breathable levels. [118] ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 05:04, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Isn't there an issue of increasing the gravity, or inventing some alternative way of keeping the breatheable atmosphere there. I mean Mars is like Earth's Moon, and some asterioids, in that it is one thing to add a breathable atmosphere, it is another thing for it to stay there. User:AlMac|(talk) 10:05, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
The gravity is sufficient to keep the atmosphere. I believe the thinking was that the previous atmosphere was blown away in a period of atypical solar activity. While Earth was able to rebuild, thanks in part to volcanic activity, Mars was unable to retain heat without its atmosphere, which meant little would actually evaporate. This is evidenced by the frozen C02 on Mars. Heating the planet would cause gases to form a protective atmosphere, which in turn would prevent the planet from freezing again. -- Ec5618 10:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

In terms of the finished result, a terraformed Venus would be a more attractive prospect than a terraformed Mars. However, it would be a far more difficult task to achieve and would take tens of thousands of years with our current technology level, if it were possible at all. The planet's atmosphere is deadly, and cleaning it would be extremely difficult, although some forms of terrestrial lichens and mosses could probably just about survive it the way it is now and might be utilised to improve it a little. Mars is probably the easier bet if we wanted to try any terraforming, and has the added advantage that we know that several useful chemicals are available on or just below the planet's surface that could be used in the process. Grutness...wha? 14:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

If we're so smart at changing atmospheric make-up why can't we just reduce the greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere by a few percent? Sounds like we may soon want to terraform the Earth... Notinasnaid 20:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Did you note the kind of technologies proposed for terraforming? While they are certainly plausible in our long-term future, they don't currently exist. Nor are they particularly suitable for use on an existing planet. That said, there have been proposals for active greenhouse-mitigation measures; see Mitigation of global warming and especially the section "other"; one of the more unconventional measures proposed is the placement of huge mirrors in orbit to reduce the amount of solar radiation reaching the Earth. --Robert Merkel 01:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Venus is going to be exceptionally challenging to terraform. There's no water, and it rotates very slowly. To overcome both of these factors will require smashing a whole bunch of comets into it and installing planet-sized mirror systems to simulate a terrestrial day. --Robert Merkel 01:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Integrated med school program?

What are some medical schools that offer simultaneous integrated undergrad and med school curricula in English-speaking countries? -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 02:26, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Most Australian universities teach most of their medical students as an undergraduate degree, though postgrad med is becoming more popular. --Robert Merkel 03:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
The College of Charleston (undergrad) and Medical University of South Carolina (grad) have integrated programs and are within walking distance of each other. --Kainaw (talk) 03:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm looking more at colleges along the Pacific Coast or Mid-West or New England. I have... Dixiephobia. :D -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 03:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, then it doesn't matter much, but Charleston is part of the "Southern culture". It is more like a misplaced borough or New York. --Kainaw (talk) 04:46, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
The situation in New Zealand sounds similar to that in Australia - and the med schools are all close to the Pacific Coast :) Grutness...wha? 14:26, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Most top tier colleges have that I think. I specifically know Stanford, Michigan, and Harvard have it. They are typically very competitive to gain acceptance to though. You'd probably be better off first deciding what schools you're considering and asking them if they have it. Or your counselor should be able to find you a list of schools that do. Or you could contact some of the med school supervisory type bodies to see if they have a list. - Taxman Talk 19:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AP Physics C Final Project

I'm trying to decide what to do for the final (group) project in my AP Physics C class. I was thinking about recreating Millikan's Oil-drop experiment, though the article says that it is costly and hard to do. Any other ideas of that sort that would be easier to implement? -JianLi

You can make your own hologram. There are lots of kits, but you could do it yourself. You might want to do something with a computer data hologram, which is the next big thing. --Zeizmic 13:52, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] science vs Arts

How can u say science is greater than arts?

Just... No. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 10:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
One could say that science is an art, so art is the superset. But I doubt that's what you mean by 'greater'. So let me ask the obvious question: What do you mean? By 'great' and by 'art' ('science' is fairly well defined (but don't ask me for a definition :) )). And if yo don't answer this, then can we assume you were just trying to stir things up a bit? :) DirkvdM 11:18, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Ok, let's go into this. On one side, the Eötvös Lóránd University of sciences has eight faculties and is clearly the greatest university in the whole country. Add to this some faculties of the Technical university, and the Corvinus university which are also concerned with science, and all four faculties of the Semmelweis University (medicine is a science). Now on the otehr side, compare this to the four small universities of arts in Budapest: the Liszt Ferenc Academy of Music, the University of Art and Design, the Academy of Fine Arts, and the Színház- és Filmművészeti Egyetem, consisting of a single faculty each. Clearly the science universities are much greater. I think this is not only a speciality of Budapest either, but the whole world is like this. (Don't take this reply too seriously please.) – b_jonas 14:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

It has been said that any science with more than seven variables becomes an art (can't remember who said it, unfortunately...). I don't think there's any practical way of comparing science and art in terms of greatness - any comparison will be subjective. It's like saying "which is greater - basketball or chocolate?" Then again, as the hymn says, "How great Thou art" :) Grutness...wha? 14:23, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

It's not at all the same thing: Your question is perfectly easy to answer. Chocolate, of course. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 16:49, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
You're all wrong, the correct answer is actually chocolate basketballs--205.188.116.74 16:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I thought it was 42. deeptrivia (talk) 03:58, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
No, that's the answer to everything and the question is about about only two things. DirkvdM 11:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orbit of pluto

Why the orbit of pluto is different than the orbits of other planets?

Please search to find your answer on your own. The reference desk is not a search engine. See Pluto#Orbit. It is presumed Pluto did not form as the 'other' planets did. When it was found, its size was found to be remarkably small. Years later it was found that the size that had been measured actually included a small moon (including the distance between the two), meaning the actual planet was ridiculously small. As such, Pluto may not be a planet, and may not have formed in the same plane around the sun as the 'other' planets. -- Ec5618 10:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
  • It's sometimes difficult to anwer your question as it may depend on your grade level. Although the Wikipedia Reference desk is not a search engine, some of the responses here will try to be tailored to your particular need. I hope that we have been able to structure our comments in a constructive way. If you wish to do so, please post your comments here as to the usefulness of this resource, Thanks, hydnjo talk 07:51, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
If it were exactly the same as that of another planet it would be that other planet. :)
The orbits of planets can differ in various ways. Which one do you mean? Distance to the Sun, eccentricity or inclination? Kepler's laws of planetary motion might also be an interresting read. From these, just follow the interreting links and learn. DirkvdM 11:28, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Because Pluto is not a planet...though I'm not sure I want to open up that debate here. :o) EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 16:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
It all comes down to an arbitrary definition of planet, which is currently under review. The jury is still out. JackofOz 19:32, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
The statement "Years later it was found that the size that had been measured actually included a small moon (including the distance between the two)" is wrong. Pluto's size was originally estimated based on its brightness (which meant guessing at its albedo, i.e. how light-colored its surface is) and on the gravitational effects it was thought to have had on Uranus's orbit. Later it was realized that no such effects had been detected (I think the orbit of Neptune had originally been miscalculated and Neptune was actually responsible for them) and so Pluto had to be much smaller than originally believed. The relevance of the discovery of Charon is not that it revealed an error in the earlier estimates, but that for the first time a measurement that was better than an estimate was possible. --Anonymous, 17:37 UTC, January 31.

[edit] power electronics

what is the career scope for power electronics engineering graduation?What dose make difference between electronics and power elctronics?

See power electronics. DJ Clayworth 17:03, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The worlds most prominant religion?

Just wondering, why is it that everyone is up in arms about religious persecution, and seperation of church and state? I mean christianity is fast becoming one of the most practiced religions on the face of the earth! If every day, more and more people are seeing the error of their ways, and converting to the true christian faith, then why is it nessesary to appease the tiny, shrinking, portion of the earth's population who keep making such a big stink about it? Can't we just accept that secularists, athiests, religion haters, and the whole middle eastern mess, are going to eventually all see the light, and convert to a true faith? Why must governments be bullied into supporting alternate religions? and tolerance of aithiests and other hate mongers? Can't we just accpet that the United States in a Christian Nation? That in reality all modern societies are in fact Christian Nations? That in effect every civilized society is Christian? Why are people who are suppsoedly scientific, rational, and tolerant, so unable to show compassion to Christianity?--64.12.116.74 16:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a science-related question? --JWSchmidt 16:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Should we delete this, or leave it as an example of deliberate scummery? I tend to lean towards destruction. --Zeizmic 16:31, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
This is being cross-posted to all the RD sections. Just another nut on a rant. Leave it here. People need a good laugh now and then. --Kainaw (talk) 17:27, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I think we should try not to pass comment on this, despite its countless flaws, simply because we don't want to feed him... smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 19:28, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


Ehmm, I assumed this was meant as a joke. If there are people in the US who honestly think like this we should be really scared because that country owns by far the biggest military weapons assortment (and proven willing to use it often enough). Then again, we've got the SGP in the Netherlands, who want to get rid of anyone who doesn't follow their religion, including christians (despite the fact that they are themselves a christian sect) and they get a few percent of the political votes. Anyway, if this should be ignored or removed, then why do the creationist questions get so many replies?
By the way, this makes me think of this missionary who said "They're already good christians, they just don't know it yet" :). DirkvdM 20:42, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Cheap shot, Dirk. There may be people in the US who think this, but they aren't threatening you with death for criticizing or ridiculing them. Look around you in Europe and see what the real religious threat to civilization and rational discourse is: [119] [120] Dalembert 01:16, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
I think yo umisread. The Netherlands is in Europe. And Theo van Gogh is no longer a threat because he's dead. :) DirkvdM 11:15, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

It is no joke. I have met real people like this in the real world, where most of us try to be civilized in dealing with people of differeing belief systems, including some who unfortunately do not share the concept of being civilized and understanding their fellow mankind. Here we are working on an encyclopaedia about science and human knowledge. This question is about religious fantasy and how to correlate people beliefs and actions. The person who placed this question belongs in either a mental institution, or perhaps a psychiatric office, but the scary thing is that there are so many people just like them, in high public office, voted there by other people who have same kind of ideology. User:AlMac|(talk) 21:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed; clearly his idea of developed nations doesn't cover Japan or many other developed nations, just the Christianosphere (is that a word?). To paraphase the poster; Why are people who are suppsoedly scientific, rational, and tolerant, so unable to show compassion to non-Christians? Sorry for snapping... smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 21:50, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Anyone following Jason Gastrich (talk • contribs) on wikipedia would be aware that there are people who think this way. David D. (Talk) 01:21, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Many people have beliefs that other people find strange. That doesn't mean they belong in a mental institution or a psychiatrist's office. How does that comment square with trying to be civilized in dealing with people of differing belief systems? JackofOz 08:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Brain

How is the brain able to interpret sound?

The stony silence is because this is homework. But why am I wasting my Carpal juice? Most homework-seekers never come back. --Zeizmic 23:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
You could say: "It doesn't interpret sound. You just imagine that it does." --Kainaw (talk) 01:32, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

It's not necessarily homework.--172.131.187.70 04:46, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree, I didn't get the feeling that this was a homework question. --AySz88^-^ 05:41, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Robert Jourdain's book "Music, the Brain and Ecstasy" is a fascinating and revealing study of just what sound and music are, and what it means to "hear" anything. There's a review of it here. JackofOz 06:39, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Read sound and ear and take things from there. - Mgm|(talk) 10:18, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Electronic glass/windows

I was wondering how those electronic windows works. Its kinda smart. You just push a butten, and then the window will be nontransparent (like frosted) And if you push again, it will turn back to transparency. I have also seen examples where the window just tints into black. how? and where to buy maybee?

There is a stub article at smart windows; check out the links from there for an overview of the technology. Not sure where you'd buy them though. LarryMac 20:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, the electrochromic windows! I nearly got a job at one of the outfits that make them! They contain either polytungstates ("heteropolyblue") that look quite like molybdenum blue or viologens. Pilatus 05:22, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clean Rocks

might be the wrong place to ask this but i will anyways....

Are there any rocks that keep water cleaner over other rocks? or all rocks the same and it doesn't matter what type are in the water?

Do you mean rocks that clean the water (such as pebbles the water passes through) or rocks that don't make the water dirty? And are you talking about running or standing water? I suppose you mean an artificial garden pond, but that's not obvious. DirkvdM 20:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
At last a rock question! But I have no idea what you are talking about, sorry. --Zeizmic 20:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Have you been hanging around here just waiting for a rock question? :) In that case you must be very disappointed not to understand it. DirkvdM 11:18, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Charcoal is one of the best water cleaners there is, but I realize it isn't quite a full-fledged member of the Lithic Brotherhood (maybe more like an immigrant from the vegetable kingdom). alteripse 01:38, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I guess i wasn't clear enough..... very sorry about that. What i am looking for are rocks that don't make the water dirty.... making a pond for fish, there will be a water filter attached to the pond, i guess you could say it is semi standing water....what would the benifit of running water over standing water? ..... would different types of rocks do something different to the water? If still doesn't make sense let me know :p

[edit] low energy lamps

hi!!! my name is jennifer. Im writing to you hoping you can help me!!! I have searched and searched for answers to my questions but it is useless... please help me... I want to know what a LOW ENERGY LAMP (THE ROUND ONES) contents!! I mean,¿What CHEMICALS are inside of these lamps?, ALL OF THEM! THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. goodbye J.

That's a good question. You look at Fluorescent lamp, and come back later if you have to. --Zeizmic 20:53, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Could she be talking about LEDs? ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 20:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Hello Jennifer. Come back to us! I chose Fluorescents because they are a chemical soup, the other guy chose LEDS because they are rounder. You pick the winner! --Zeizmic 22:46, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

She probably mean fluroresence. They contain Mercury, and Phosphorus.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/f/Wikipedia%7EReference_desk_archive_Science_January_2006_9d6a.html"