Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Miscellaneous/2006 August 24

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< August 23 Miscellaneous desk archive August 25 >
Humanities Science Mathematics Computing/IT Language Miscellaneous Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions at one of the pages linked to above.

Contents

[edit] Dodgers Captains

I was thinking about this today? Can somebody name all of the Dodgers' Captains both in Brooklyn and Los Angeles? Pee Wee Reese is a given, and I don't believe that they have one currently. Other than that, who would be on a "Dodgers' Captains" list?

Thanks.

From Clifford Blau's website:

1890 Brooklyn NL Hub Collins 1890 Brooklyn NL Tommy Burns 1890 Brooklyn NL Darby O'Brien 1891 Brooklyn NL John Ward 1892 Brooklyn NL John Ward 1893 Brooklyn NL Dave Foutz 1893 Brooklyn NL Darby O'Brien 1894 Brooklyn NL Mike Griffin? 1894 Brooklyn NL Dave Foutz 1895 Brooklyn NL Dave Foutz 1895 Brooklyn NL Mike Griffin 1896 Brooklyn NL Mike Griffin 1897 Brooklyn NL Mike Griffin 1898 Brooklyn NL Mike Griffin 1899 Brooklyn NL Joe Kelley 1900 Brooklyn NL Joe Kelley 1901 Brooklyn NL Joe Kelley 1902 Brooklyn NL Willie Keeler 1903 Brooklyn NL Jack Doyle 1904 Brooklyn NL Frank Dillon 1905 Brooklyn NL Jimmy Sheckard 1906 Brooklyn NL Doc Casey 1907 Brooklyn NL Doc Casey 1908 Brooklyn NL Harry Lumley 1909 Brooklyn NL Harry Lumley 1910 Brooklyn NL Al Burch 1911 Brooklyn NL John Hummel 1912 Brooklyn NL Jake Daubert 1913 Brooklyn NL 1914 Brooklyn NL Jake Daubert 1915 Brooklyn NL Jake Daubert 1916 Brooklyn NL Jake Daubert 1919 Brooklyn NL Zack Wheat 1920 Brooklyn NL Zack Wheat 1921 Brooklyn NL Zack Wheat 1922 Brooklyn NL Zack Wheat 1923 Brooklyn NL Zack Wheat 1924 Brooklyn NL Zack Wheat 1925 Brooklyn NL Zack Wheat 1925 Brooklyn NL Jack Fournier 1926 Brooklyn NL Jack Fournier 1927 Brooklyn NL Max Carey 1928 Brooklyn NL Max Carey 1929 Brooklyn NL Glenn Wright 1930 Brooklyn NL Glenn Wright 1931 Brooklyn NL Glenn Wright 1932 Brooklyn NL Glenn Wright 1933 Brooklyn NL Glenn Wright 1933 Brooklyn NL Jimmy Jordan 1934 Brooklyn NL Al Lopez 1935 Brooklyn NL Al Lopez 1936 Brooklyn NL Lonnie Frey 1937 Brooklyn NL None 1938 Brooklyn NL Leo Durocher 1941 Brooklyn NL Dolf Camilli 1942 Brooklyn NL Dolf Camilli 1943 Brooklyn NL Dolf Camilli 1949 Brooklyn NL Pee Wee Reese 1950 Brooklyn NL Pee Wee Reese 1951 Brooklyn NL Pee Wee Reese 1952 Brooklyn NL Pee Wee Reese 1953 Brooklyn NL Pee Wee Reese 1954 Brooklyn NL Pee Wee Reese 1955 Brooklyn NL Pee Wee Reese 1956 Brooklyn NL Pee Wee Reese 1957 Brooklyn NL Pee Wee Reese 1958 Los Angeles NL Pee Wee Reese 1959 Los Angeles NL None 1960 Los Angeles NL None 1961 Los Angeles NL None 1962 Los Angeles NL Duke Snider 1963 Los Angeles NL None 1964 Los Angeles NL None 1965 Los Angeles NL Maury Wills 1966 Los Angeles NL Maury Wills 1969 Los Angeles NL Maury Wills 1970 Los Angeles NL Unknown 1971 Los Angeles NL Maury Wills 1973 Los Angeles NL Willie Davis 1976 Los Angeles NL Davey Lopes 1977 Los Angeles NL Davey Lopes 1978 Los Angeles NL Davey Lopes 1979 Los Angeles NL Davey Lopes 1980 Los Angeles NL Davey Lopes 1981 Los Angeles NL Davey Lopes 1983 Los Angeles NL Bill Russell 1985 Los Angeles NL None 1985 Los Angeles NL Bill Russell

When there is more than one listings for the same year, it's because of a discrepancy between sources. See the website for more details.

Mwalcoff 03:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Another baseball question

Didn't the American League used to have a rule that no inning could start after 1 a.m.? In a recent Yankees-Red Sox game, the 10th inning started at about 1:04. When did the AL get rid of that rule? -- Mwalcoff 04:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Maybe they meant regulation? --Proficient 05:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
No, I'm pretty sure the rule was used mainly in extra-inning games. -- Mwalcoff 22:45, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] fruit cultivation in india

fruits exported from india.detailed map of major fruit exporting states of india. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.9.242 (talk • contribs)

ask specific questions.use full sentences.use appropriate capitalisation.don't expect people to do your work for you or read your mind.sign your posts. Anchoress 08:10, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Unlike when googling, in Wikipedia you may allow yourself to express in a normal way. People shall answer the same way if they feel fit to. E.g. : "fruits exported from india" is for googling, "Please, can you help me to find which fruits are exported from india, and specifically do you know of a map, etc. many thanks" may be more relevant here. Thank you. -- DLL .. T 19:36, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stained glass

Those stained glass things in churches-what are they called? I looked in the church article and can't find what i'm looking for.

Stained glass windows ? StuRat 11:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that's RIGHT. Umm yeah thanks for that, no idea why i din't think of that before.Cuban Cigar 11:55, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Cause you were smokin somethin. — [Mac Davis] (talk)
Questions like this are the reason I spend so much time at the reference desk. DJ Clayworth 16:48, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
lol. --Proficient 23:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah man.... windows.... theyre cool!--Light current 02:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Not to mention penguins. DirkvdM 07:59, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
They are also called Illuminated (Stained or Painted)Glass Windows, and also Illuminated Lights. But Stained Glass Windows is in order amongst the proletariat classes.

[edit] Sala Trees

Is the Sala Tree the same as a Bodhi tree?

Apparently not. According to tradition, Siddhārtha was born beneath the Śālā tree in Lumbini, Nepal. The Bodhi tree, under which he meditated when he achieved Nirvana. was located at Bodh Gaya in Bihar (India). --LambiamTalk 16:18, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
The modern spelling is sal which is a Shorea robusta. A bodhi tree is a Ficus religiosa. --Shantavira 17:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] about Bill clinton's daughter--Chelsea.

I like to meet her beccause i love her.pls tell me if she is still single.in short i want to marry her.Iam a Nigerian christian,telephone is--you fool, do you think she will really call this number? She wouldn't but some spammers would, e-mail;<email removed>TONY

Chelsea Clinton is not married. Good luck.--Shantavira 17:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I preffer Jo Swinson

Is this the prequel to him coming into a fortune and then emailing us to tell us about his untold riches which he will generously share with us upon payment of a small processing fee and our bank account details? :)

If Chelsea is reading...then she can get in touch...Do we have a Wikistalking..er I mean Wikiromance section?Lemon martini 21:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

No we don't. Most Wikistalkers merely create lengthy Wikipedia articles about the objects of their desire :) --Robert Merkel 23:40, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] magnetic fields

where can i find info about electro magnetic pulses? is there any web sites or books on that paticular subject?

How about electromagnetic pulse? Notinasnaid 17:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
(gasp!) Get out... BenC7 10:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Latin American Globalization Index

Dear Wikipedia. The page on the Latin American Globalization Index has been tagged by Wikipedia as Advertisement. I have read the guidelines and wonder why you have tagged this as advertising. I feel that the entry is objective. Thank you, Joachim Bamrud, editor, Latin Business Chronicle

As instructed on that page, you need improve the article or argue your case on that article's talk page. We cannot help you from here.--Shantavira 18:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
While the Wikipedia:Help desk is the usual place for this kind of question, the organization of that page is itself less than helpful and ends up misleading some posters here. For this article, I have asked the person who added the tag to add a comment on the article talk page. Rmhermen 18:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
And I;ve edited the article and removed the tag. It is notable, however, that the article and another on Latin Business Chronicle have been appended to wikipedia by the editor of the Latin Business Chronicle. There must be some questions about the notability of the chronicle and its index; others might wish to consider whether the articles should remain. --Tagishsimon (talk)

[edit] Laughing cavalier

I have a very old painting of the Laughing Cavalier,my stepfather traviled all lot all over the world. he was very wealthy and much older than my mother.Both my parents have passed a way. I know have this oil painting and would like to know where to go have it cleaned apraised. I do know that it isn't the orginal but I would like to see if it has any value. it is a perfect match to the one's on the interenet, but it has gotten so dirty and the painters name is not clear to the eye. ithe sig.is located in the upper right hand side of the painting but I can't make it out. The frame is very old it is being held together with beg's (wedge.s of wood) in the corners. it seem to be in gold leaf or possible paint? I was thinking that you might be able to turn me in the right direction thank you

their is a nice shop for that on High street across from the barbers
Look in your phone book for a good antique dealer specialising in art; they should be able to give you a quote or point you in the right direction. Ziggurat 00:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Why not start at the top? Sotheby's and Christie's would be good places to sell a famous classic painting like Laughing Cavalier if you happen to have possession of it. Who knows, you might have a slightly different version from the same studio. If they say it is a copy of only "decorative value" then you could sell it on eBay. Edison 13:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Meeting Queen Elizabeth II?

How would I go about meeting HRH Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom? For only a few minutes. Just so I could say something like "Hello, your Majesty", and she would say "Hello to you too". JIP | Talk 20:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Do something that's awarded with an Order of the British Empire, become a head of state, or become the UK prime minister, the owner or manager of a theatre, captain of a ship, or other representative of a place that Her Majesty visits, become the representative of an NGO that is related to Her Majesty, etc. You could also just write to Buckingham Palace and ask if there are any opportunities to meet her. --GunnarRene 20:36, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Should somebody put this generic question at the top? (not that anybody reads it!). The question is: "I would like to meet -a very famous person-, how can I?" And we would say: "We have no idea how you can meet -this very famous person-. If we did, we wouldn't be stuck in our basements, all alone, doing this sh*t. --Zeizmic 21:13, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

No, each famous person is different in some ways. Meeting and talking to Richard Stallman for example, was easy, since he came to hold a guest lecutre and took questions. The Japanese Emperor came to visit the city too, but since I was not the representative of the student body, I settled for waving back at him and taking a slight bow.
There actually are famous people on Wikipedia, and Jimbo talks to celebrities. Perhaps one way would be to call CrystalBuckingham Palace and offer to correct some errors on the Queen's Wikipedia page :-) --GunnarRene 21:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC) And I'm on the top floor too (not the attic).

CRYSTAL Palace??? Has the Queen taken up as a centre-forward? Lemon martini 21:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Have you considered applying for work at the Palace? Positions are very occasionally advertised in the London Evening Standard, on the Buckingham Palace website or through various agencies. You would not normally be expected to chime 'Hello Ma'am' unless previously spoken to --russ 22:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
The sensible answer is to find out where she is making a public appearance and get there early so that if and when she does a walkabout, you can be at the front of the crowd. Her coming engagements are listed on the Royal Family website. By the way, I met her once. She was OK. --Richardrj 22:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Considering that she has spent most of her adult life as a professional at making small talk on such engagements, it's not really a surprise that she's good at it (and she is very good by all reports, including yours). One thing to keep in mind that it's probably getting a little bit harder than it used to be to do so, because I believe that she's cutting back on her public engagements these days. --Robert Merkel 23:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
By the way, if you do ever meet her, make sure you get her title right. She's HM, not HRH. --Richardrj 01:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Correct, but you wouldn't be addressing her by that or any other title. I believe "Ma'am" is the usual form of address. JackofOz 03:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
On first responding to her (you do not address her first) "Your Majesty", subsequently "Ma'am", which it is said she prefers to be pronounced "Mam", not "Marm". Tonywalton  | Talk 07:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Apart from arriving early when she's going to do a walkabout, one way is to be involved in whatever it is she's visiting. My brother was involved in building something Prince Charles was opening, and got introduced to him. Strangely, both my next door neighbour and myself have met the Queen - he was part of the crew who originally installed the engines of the Royal Yacht Britannia back in the 1950s, and all the survivors were invited back when she was decommissioned about 10 years ago. In my case, an invitation to a Buckingham Palace Garden Party arrived in the post one day - I've no idea how I got on the list, but an involvement in local politics may have helped! -- Arwel (talk) 21:19, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
There are some very good responses here. I met The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh several times in my public service career, and found them both to be very warm and personable characters, with the inimitable ability to put 'new' people at their ease. Ma'am and Sir were always the expected and accepted form of address, and a very light handshake de rigeur. But engineering an introduction to HMQ is well nigh impossible, unless, as above, you are fortunate enough to be invited (like myself and my wife) to a Palace Garden Party, either at Buckingham Palace in London, or Holyrood Palace in Edinburgh. But I have been involved, in my official capacity, in organising functions when The Queen has asked to meet unsuspecting people from the waiting crowds. Except on 2 such occasions, there were no crowds - just a handful of people who were curious to see her, and in both cases, those invited to be introduced just happened to be holding a posy of flowers for her. So I guess the trick is to be somewhere where there isn't a large turnout anticipated (usually in Scotland where enthusiastic support for The Monarchy is less in evidence than in other parts of the UK), and be sure that you and your posy are well observed by one of the officials well before HMQ arrives. Clearly however, Royal Security Personnel are always well represented at such functions and thankfully, anyone intent on using such an impromptu introduction opportunity for sinister reasons would be easily 'profiled' before any incident could be initiated.
I beleive if a royal subject lives to 100, they are to meet the Queen... Not sure about how true this is, though. -Russia Moore 03:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I can't speak for the UK, but Australians who reach 100 can arrange through their member of parliament to have the Queen send them a congratulatory message. JackofOz 09:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rolex replicas?

I keep getting spam about Rolex replicas for sale. Why the bloody fsck would anyone want one? If I want a cheap watch, I buy a cheaper brand of watch. If I want a Rolex, I buy a real Rolex. If all one needs is a watch, any old watch will do. If one really is obsessed with having a Rolex, then only a real Rolex will do, because there's always going to be someone who can spot the difference. Anyway, very few Finns seem to have a watch at all nowadays. They just look at their cellphones (Nokia, of course). Sorry, I just needed to vent my frustration. JIP | Talk 20:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I think the people who buy Rolex replicas just want to impress other people. If somebody looks at your watch, they may not know that it's not a real Rolex. --Bowlhover 22:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
My brother specifically wanted a fake Rolex, for its camp value. Also, obviously, not everyone can afford a real Rolex. Ziggurat 00:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mirrors

I have heard that you can tell a real mirror from a two way mirror by putting your finger one the mirror and if there is a gap between your finger and the reflection its a real mirror and if you put you finger on a two way mirror there is no gap. Is this true? If so why does the real mirror have a gap and why does the two way mirror not have a gap?

It has been my experience that this is true! The reason for the gap in the real mirror is because the relective sheet is behind the glass, which is a few mm thick, "doubled" since light has to go through the glass twice. Two way mirrors have the reflective surface applied directly to the outside, so when you touch the mirror, there is no layer of glass between the reflective surface and finger. Of course, a clever mirrorist could probably just place another pane of glass on your side to prevent touching it. Hyenaste (tell) 23:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't know about 2-way mirrors, but there is a definite gap with a normal one. If you want to identify a 2-way mirror it tends to be Shiner than a normal one.Ken 23:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Technically it is a one-way Mirror, a two way mirror would not be a mirror but a window. Nowimnthing 23:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I assume that by "wo-way mirror" you mean what is usually called "one-way mirror": On one side it functions like a mirror, while on the other side it allows people (psychologists, detectives) to look through it, like through a window. The story is not true. Modern mirrors consist of sheet of glass with a thin reflective layer of "silver" (actually aluminium) deposited on the back. The glass layer, which is between your finger and the reflective layer, is the cause of the gap you see. Since the light has to travel twice through the glass, it seems to be twice as thick as a single sheet of glass. In a normal mirror, the silver layer is covered with a layer of (non-transparent) paint for protection. In a one-way mirror, the paint is omitted. The silver layer may be thinner, and there may be a second backing sheet of glass, because the silver layer is very vulnerable to scratches and corrosion. The gap can be eliminated by depositing the reflective layer on the front instead of on the back, but as before, that makes it very vulnerable. --LambiamTalk 23:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Actually I think they are called "two-way mirrors". The name is confusing until you realize there's no actual directionality to the mirror itself. The directionality comes from the difference in the intensity of ambient light in the two rooms. In the room where it looks like a mirror, the lights are on high, and the reflection from the room dominates the transmission from the dimly-lit observers' room. --Trovatore 23:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Maybe you will want to fight it out with the guys over at Mirror#One-way mirror. I think two-way is just a popular mistake. Looking at a couple dictionaries though it may be more of a language issue, OED lists two-way mirror, but redirects to UK=one-way mirror. Maybe it is more of an American vs British thing. Nowimnthing 14:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
On reflection (rim shot!) it's "one-way" that's the popular mistake. The thing actually does act as a mirror in two directions (and also transmits light in two directions), so "two-way mirror" is the version that makes sense, whichever side of the pond you're on. An ordinary mirror might reasonably be called a one-way mirror (seen from the back, it's not a mirror at all). --Trovatore 18:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
No idea what they are called, but the windows disguised as mirrors oft times can be seen through if you cup your hands around your eyes. They also usually look too silver (like chrome) or appear a greenish, dirty color. -Russia Moore 03:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is humour quantifiable?

Sounds like a totally dumb question, I know. My point is, is humour related to our past experience as most other emotional responses, or are some things funny regardless of culture and experience? Clearly our sense of fun is important to us, but does it have an evolutionary role, or is it something that exists purely in the human psyche? --russ 22:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

More like a funny question. I've heard a clown who had travelled the world claim that the same (non-verbal) things make kids scream with laughter across all cultures. Although there is no generally accepted explanation about any evolutionary role, I could not help observing that for many a fine nubile woman the number-one requirement for a suitable mate is that he can make her laugh, trumping looks and earning power. It is certainly quantifiable how many laughs per hour a suitor can elicit. --LambiamTalk 23:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Not quite sure what you mean by "Is humour quantifiable?" since the rest of your question doesn't seem to relate to it unless you're asking can a joke be objectively rated on it's amusingness, the answer to which is of course no since it's subjective. Most of what you're asking seems to be discussed in the Laughter article. --Kiltman67 23:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps he used "quantifiable" mistakenly. --Proficient 23:44, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
In the sense of "can any hard scientific statements be made about it". Quantification is an important aspect of hard science, it distinguishes it from the 'soft sciences'. DirkvdM 08:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps he intended to mean "definable"? I remember my prof H. N. Mahabala telling that, while at MIT, he worked on a project to "teach" a computer to distinguish between a joke and a non-joke. I'd presume they would've defined several features of a joke. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 08:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
It is remarkable to see that body gestures convey humour accurately, a success that written humour easily fails, because the plain sense of the words is the first to touch our brain without hints from the body or the voice. That's why emoticons were designed for (and not computers). -- DLL .. T 18:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Can a college mailroom legally open my mail??

Hi

I recently received a shipment to my college via UPS, and it was signed for my someone in the mailroom. It was a package of co2 cannisters used for paintball, and it was 'deemed suspicous' by the weight of the item and the sound it made in the package, and was opened and sent to the college police department, and I have been placed on probation for receiving a dangerous item.

Is it legal what they did? Can they legally open my mail, even though it came properly packaged and was within UPS's guidelines for transportation of pressurized gases? What are my rights?

I am in desperate need of a response, and can't afford a lawyer, although I need one. I feel they violated my rights opening that package.


71.56.107.20 22:55, 24 August 2006 (UTC) John Doe

You need a lawyer, but I would check to see what you signed when you registered for college. There might have been some fine print waiving certain personal privacy rights on college grounds. Nowimnthing 22:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, maybe you should contact the ACLU? Also, does your college have some kind of student representative body? --Robert Merkel 23:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I would think there would be some kind of general waiver that would apply to this kind of situation. --Proficient 23:45, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
See Legal Aid, for free lawyer links. StuRat 23:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Seen from the UK, I have to say this, and things like the Philip Sandifer incident [1] give rise to the view that the US, far from being "the land of the free" is rather a police state. Enjoy. --Tagishsimon (talk)
Think about this very carefully. Do you really want your college to be in a position where it has to say "we think there may be a bomb in this parcel, but legally we're not allowed to do anything so we'll just deliver it as normal". DJ Clayworth 16:19, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
But there was not a bomb in it. And the guy's been put on probation. For receiving some weird heavy things. How many college students receive bombs by mail? Do we really need people checking for this? --Tagishsimon (talk)
Oh yes, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." ColourBurst 13:16, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Which country are you uin? That is always a first bit of knowledge needed to answer any legal questions.
My mother went to a school run by nuns, who opened letters pupils sent home (and even 'corrected' them back to ancient spelling, so there was nothing secretive about that). Most countries will have escaped the middle ages by now, so this should not have happened. They might have informed the police and they might then have opened it. I don't know the law well enough for that. But a school should never have such a right. Ayway, I don't understand one thing. You were put on probation? First, doesn't that onluy apply after you've been found guilty? So after the trial you don't seem to have had yet. And secondly, for what? They now know (illegally or not) they're canisters of CO2, so what's the problem? DirkvdM 07:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Parachute failure survival

I read the other week about a man who fell 2,000 feet and survived with just bruises. How do people survive these kind of falls? And what is the best thing to aim for? --iamajpeg 23:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Most likely the survivors had a partial parachute deployment, which reduces the speed of the jumper significantly, although not as much as usual. StuRat 23:44, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Indeed. Something decelerated their fall to make them survive. --Proficient 23:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Some people are just lucky, I guess. I suppose that if you deliberately land feet first, and bend your knees and allow sudden deceleration to crush your legs, then you'll have a better chance of being alive after several weeks in hospital than if you'd landed on your head. Protect the head and the spine - the rest can be fixed, or can be lived without. --Kurt Shaped Box 23:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
You might want to read [2]. Apparently, snow banks and trees (ideally conifers) are best at breaking your fall. I suppose you could also try for a steep slope, a breakable roof, or marshy ground. Concrete and water are not a good idea.
Oh yeah - apparently the right way to hit the ground is a five-point landing: feet, calf, thigh, buttock, shoulder. By splitting the fall five ways you're converting a 120mph landing into a ~55mph landing on each contact point - you'll break some bones but it is survivable. EdC 03:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Ah, even better: Everything on how to fall out of an aeroplane. EdC 03:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
This is one of those recurring questions. We should really make a faq.
About the five point landing - that makes sense for parachutists because they come down feet first. But wouldn't a judo roll (or what is that called?) make more sense? That way you spread the fall over the entire side of your body. It would require perfect timing, though. And therefore practise, but for parachutists that would make sense. DirkvdM 08:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Theyre just called breakfalls. side, back, front (or face fall)--Light current 23:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
My experience is limited as I have only done a tandem jump (and I wasn't the instructor) but :

-water is definitely a bad idea, if you do have to land in water, you have to cut yourself off the parachte like three meters above the surface; otherwise you will drown with the parachute - usually a parachute can be controlled (going left or right) but a very important thing is to NEVER LAND IN THE DIRECTION THE WIND IS GOING, always in the opposite direction. So it requires quick thinking and good estimations of the situations if you think you are going a bit too far : if you turn around, will you still have to time to turn around a second time?Evilbu 12:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Another thing to think about is Terminal velocity. You will be going no faster when you hit the ground from 20,000 feet than you would from 10 story building ~120 mph. Nowimnthing 14:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree with the spirit of nowimthing's answer, but not the numbers - it will take a bit more than 10 stories to get to terminal velocity. Assuming there is no drag (which is the generous case), it should take about 150 meters, which is 60 or 70 stories, and with drag, it will take longer (say 100 stories). But it's the same idea. At some point, the extra distance makes no difference. --bmk
Oops, left a zero off my calculations, thanks for the catch. Free-fall gives 1,000 feet as the time for terminal velocity in the box position. 1,000 ft divided by ~10 ft per story equals 100 stories. Nowimnthing 16:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Now if I ever accidentally fall out of a plane I know what to do --iamajpeg 13:35, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Where can I go to sound off...

...about the bastards robbing Pluto of its status as a planet? Anywhere I can go on the internet to register my disgust? I don't want to come across as a crackpot but this is just disgraceful in my opinion and pure revisionism of the most base kind. --84.65.80.22 23:40, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

"Whenever life get you down, Mrs. Brown
And things seem hard or tough
And people are stupid, obnoxious or daft
And you feel that you've had quite enu-hu-hu-huuuuff
Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving
And revolving at 900 miles an hour
That's orbiting at 19 miles a second, so it's reckoned
A sun that is the source of all our power
The sun and you and me, and all the stars that we can see
Are moving at a million miles a day
In an outer spiral arm, at 40,000 miles an hour
Of the galaxy we call the Milky Way
The universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding
In all of the directions it can whiz
As fast as it can go, at the speed of light you know
Twelve million miles a minute and that's the fastest speed there is
So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure
How amazingly unlikely is your birth
And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space
Because there's bugger all down here on Earth"
God bless you, monty python people --bmk ("The Galaxy Song")
What sort of answer is that? Is no-one else concerned about the complete re-write of history that has now been greenlighted by the IAU? They're playing right into the hands of the creationists - by denying the existence of one planet, they're giving the right-wing loons the space to suggest that other planets may only exist as a concept designed to disprove the existence of God. It's the thin end of the wedge and no-one seems to care! I'll be damned if I'll ever change my beliefs. Pluto exists. I know it exists and I will not bow down to anyone that tries to convince me otherwise. We're not living in Orwell's 1984 here - just because they say that something hapepened or never happened doesn't mean that what they say is true! --84.65.80.22 00:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Um, they're not denying that it exists, they're clarifying (for the first time) how we define the term 'planet'. It's a question of classification, that's all. Originally the term only applied to those solar-system bodies that were consistently visible from Earth (including the sun and moon), so it's not like this is a complete re-write of anyone's history. Ziggurat 00:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I think you may be misunderstanding the significance of this, if i may be so bold. They are not saying that Pluto no longer exists. Simply that, as our understanding of our Universe grows, we must refine our classification systems to encompass our new understanding.
Consider algae. At some point they were all considered plants, we now know that some are protists, so they were reclassified. This decision has no impact on the continued existance of algae, so whats the big deal?
It seems to me that "never changing your beliefs" is dogmatic and much more akin to creationism than the methods of the scientists you criticise. They are remaining open minded about how what we do not yet know can change what we think we know. Rockpocket 00:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
He's got a point. As we all know, the reclassification of fifteen perfectly well-accepted planets in 1850 destroyed the fabric of post-Enlightenment science as we know it, plunging the world into the terrible theocratic state it is today. Or, er, something. Shimgray | talk | 19:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Much closer to home, I remember having the same kind of outrage when I discovered that Australia was no longer considered the world's largest island, because it was reclassified as a continental land mass. Then I was equally outraged when Uluru/Ayers Rock lost its title as the world's largest monolith. It was one thing to concede that Mount Augustus was much bigger anyway, but Uluru couldn't even take 2nd place on the list since it was no longer classified as a monolith at all. Yes, those school teachers sure have a lot to answer for by only teaching us current knowledge and not future knowledge. JackofOz 01:43, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The biggest problem I have is that I so throughly grokked Robert A. Heinlein's Mnemonic that I'm not sure I can remember a new one. It's not even included in the list. Mother Very Easily Made Jelly Sandwich Under No Protest. With "A" between "made and "jelly" if you wanted to include the asteroid belt. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 14:19, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
How about Colbert's:
My Very Educated Mother Just Said "Uh-oh! No Pluto! Nowimnthing 20:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Contrary to the tone in much of the media, this really isn't a demotion for Pluto; rather it's a promotion. For decades Pluto has been the uncomfortable weirdo at the the party of the planets. But these are exciting times for the inky outerparts of the solar system, and the discoveries of so many transneptunians means Pluto is no longer a singular freakish orphan - he's the brightest and nearest member of a huge family of interesting neighbours we didn't dream we had. This reclassification saves him from being a misfit loner and puts him in his proper place - Pluto, king of the great dark. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:08, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
It appers that The Planet Suite is once again complete!--Light current 23:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
That would be The Planets (note the "s", indicating there is more than 1 planet). JackofOz 09:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I was talking about 'Poor old Pluto' the other day, and we suddenly realised we were all referring to Pluto as "him" (the other planets were "it"). Presumably becuse of the dog! Jameswilson 00:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)