Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Miscellaneous/2006 September 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< September 5 Miscellaneous desk archive September 7 >
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.
< August September October >


Contents

[edit] September 6

[edit] Rafael and Fernando

Does anyone have any information about these names? Like famous people by these names, the meaning of these names, ect. They're Spanish names. Russian F 02:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

PS. I need the answers fast. Russian F 02:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Raphael is a famous renaissance painter, and, perhaps even more significantly, one of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. :-) StuRat 03:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
You can find information by looking at articles on those names. --Kiltman67 03:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Also, while googling for your answers, I ran across this web site you might find useful. SWAdair 03:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Assassins

Are there any known currently working notable assassins? I'm thinking along the lines of Carlos the Jackal and not mafia men or terrorists such as someone who worked specifically for a terrorist organization. You know, just your hired gun sort. Just curious, I'm not looking to knock over a gov't. Dismas|(talk) 02:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I never would have guessed that we have an article List of contract killers. Wikipedia has everything. SWAdair 03:15, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
why are they all men? Jasbutal 03:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for that but of those, most were in the mafia and all are either dead or in prison. Dismas|(talk) 04:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Well if they weren't and they were on that list they'd soon be anyway. DirkvdM 07:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Go into your local 'bad part of town'. Find someone who looks quite mean/tough and also looks like they're in need of a chemical pick-me-up. Offer them an 'incentive' to solve your current 'problem' (payable upon completion). Unless your target is anyone that matters, it shouldn't be too hard for your man to get up close and personal with blade/claw hammer/crowbar/etc.. The bonus here is that you get to watch (you'll need to tag along with him as he'll probably insist on immediate payment - if you offer him half upfront, there's a chance he'll just piss off somewhere to shoot up and take you for a mug). --Kurt Shaped Box 10:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm not actually looking for anyone... I just wondered if there are any notable ones around. I've always been interested in spy movies and various other undercover operative type movies so I thought I'd ask, that's all. Dismas|(talk) 12:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry mate - I don't move in those sorts of circles. :) If there are any real 'notable' ones around (i.e. guys capable of taking out someone that *does* matter) and they're any good at their profession, no-one will know who they are until they mess a job up. I'd imagine that *good* hitmen (i.e. ones that will do the job properly and remain silent if caught) are very hard to find - and expensive. --Kurt Shaped Box 18:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't move in those circles either, but I once attended a police training course in Puerto Rico (although I have never been a cop). One of the exercises was to prove the guilt of a guy who'd hired a hitman. We had access to his bank account records, but I completely missed the payment, because I couldn't believe you could hire a killer for such a small amount of money. It was considerably less than a thousand dollars.-gadfium 01:34, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid you've fallen for the Hollywood portrayal of hit men as glamorous, international businessmen who are incredibly good at what they do and therefore, get paid millions. The reality is that the average hit man is probably semi-retarded and their "brilliant plot" is to knock on the door then beat the guy who answers it to death with a baseball bat, for just enough money to get their next drug fix. StuRat 01:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I imagine that most professinal killing these days are done by professional teams connected with a goverment *put on tin foil hat now*. Jon513 18:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you. — [Mac Davis] (talk) (Desk|Help me improve)

"Carlos the Jackal" was a terrorist, not an assassan in the way you're thinking about. There was a fictional "Jackal" (in the novel and movie of the same name). Carlos also appeared in a Robert Ludlum, but the real Carlos was a terrorist and not a contract killer.Kevin fraser 01:11, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] drugs + jobs

Almost all employers in the United States give drug tests prior to or upon hiring. It is best to make a decision on which is more important to you... Continue taking drugs, or stop, clean out your system and pass the test in order to secure empoyment.

I'm applying for a fed job. What risks are there for me if they find I used illegal drugs? Jasbutal 04:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you should reconsider applying if you do indeed use illegal drugs. It will look bad and the chances are very good they will find out, as they will probably require a urine sample before allowing you to take up the job. --Proficient 05:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
i smoked pot 2 months ago, it's not like I'm going to fail a urine test...but good point in that if I ever try to apply again they might have a file on me. But fuck that, all the ex-prez's smoked . Jasbutal 05:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Rather depends on the country. There won't be many (civilised ones) where such tests are done. Drug test#Detection periods says cannabis can be found in your hair up to 90 days after last use. DirkvdM 07:21, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
You'll get fired? --Kurt Shaped Box 09:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Avoid eating any baked goods with poppy seeds on them, since this supposedly can create a false positive on drug tests. Also breathing marijuana fumes second hand can supposedly create a false positive. If you get caught and later become a politician, radio commentator, or supreme court nominee you can say it was a "youthful indescretion" regardless of how old you were at the time.Edison 15:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Say you sucked but did not inhale... or whatever bullshit the dude came up with. Philc TECI 16:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
"Tried it once, didn't like it, did nothing for me." might work too. --Kurt Shaped Box 18:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Of course if the tests are unreliable then not the people but the tests should be regarded with suspicion. And, like I said, any country that allows such tests for job applicants should also be regarded with suspicion. DirkvdM 06:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I ain't regarding their money with suspicion! Jasbutal 07:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] baseball

Number of pitchers who have hit a home run in their own no-hitter--66.217.130.164 04:21, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I would be surprised if the total was a non-zero number. You would basically have to:
  • Take all the games played
  • Divide that roughly in half since pitchers in half the league don't even bat
  • Take out all the games with a hit by both teams
  • Then take out all the games where there weren't any home runs scored (just normal runs)
Dismas|(talk) 05:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
According to No-hitter:
Two pitchers have homered while pitching no-hitters. Earl Wilson of the Boston Red Sox hit a home run during his June 26, 1962 no-hitter against the Los Angeles Angels. Rick Wise went one better: in his June 23, 1971 no-hitter against the Cincinnati Reds, the Philadelphia Phillies pitcher hit two home runs.
Note that this refers to Major League Baseball only. Remember that the designated hitter rule only went into effect in 1973. –RHolton≡– 13:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] <3 the beat

Why are some people attracted to incredibly repetitive beat intensive music that often lacks any of the melody/structure so common in most other types of music?  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  06:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Beats me. (Seriously). JackofOz 07:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Boom tsh! tsh..tsh..tsh..tsh. etc.
Its probably because it just, like, yknow, sounds great, yaknowwhatimean? By the way, i love you, dude. Seriously, i expect there may be some atavistic connection to the tribal drumming of our forefathers. Rockpocket 07:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)\
And also because it can be fun to dance to. --Richardrj talk email 07:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I recently heard that there is a connection between musical beat and heartbeat. So the beat will affect your mood. A slow beat will calm you down and a fast beat will give you a rush, like you're doing something exciting. A normal heart rate is aroun 70 bpm for men and 75 for women. Note that for adolescents it's about 80-100 bpm. So what's normal for them sounds agitated to adults. If I interpreted the theory right, maybe this should be added to Beats per minute. DirkvdM 07:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Thats very interesting, DirkvdM, and would fit in with the atavism theory. One might imagine tribal drumming to precede or follow hunts or rituals where a increased heartbeat would be expected. If you wanted to be Freudian about it one could even make an argument that there is a womb memory of your mother's heartbeat that is envoked by repetitive beats. Consider the old, "give a puppy a ticking clock" technique to comfort it. Rockpocket 07:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
But you get some very good music that is fast but you can also get some really shit music that is fast. Isnt the question more reffering to how some songs have crap repeatitive non changing non musical beats, that can be made by people completely barren of any talent, and other are exceptional music. Philc TECI 16:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Many times this can be subjective. --Proficient 03:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I heard it was the drugs you took inclined you to that type of beat-hotclaws**==(82.138.214.1 21:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC))
I like Dirk's logic. I wonder if my friends that don't like fast music all have low heart rates...  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  05:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] success and happiness

what is success and how is it related to happiness?

Success as it relates to happiness has little to do with income. It is common for people to spend their money on things they do not need. Happiness is found more often with those who live far below their means. People who pay cash for a small or fixer upper house and a used car are much happier than people who are in debt with beautiful homes, cars and lavish possesions. Furthermore, people who manage to have enough food, water, and other necessities saved up for about a year or more are more likely to feel happy, successful, and near sress free. It is more about how one percieves happiness and success. It is a state of mind that is derived from being debt free, prepared for any personal disaster, and in service to others. People who are in service to others through volunteer work and donations are generally very happy people.--JosephWisdom 20:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Inversely, if you believe your average celebrity moan about how tough their life is now they are rich and famous. Then again, these guys claim a study that shows "chronically happy people are in general more successful in their personal and professional lives." However, they claim it is not always true that "success and accomplishments bring happiness". So there you have it. But, of course, what is really important is what you define as successful in your life. You could always read about success and happiness and decide for yourself. Rockpocket 07:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
If you're happy about your life, you're successful. If you're filthy rich and unhappy, you've failed. DirkvdM 07:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

If we try to correlate wealth with happiness, I suspect that somewhere between middle class and upper class would be optimal, with those living in poverty unhappy for obvious reasons, and those with extreme wealth unhappy due to the constant stalking of reporters, risk of kidnapping, and possible guilt over whatever they had to do to get all that money in the first place. StuRat 07:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Neither can be quantified, any one at the bottom of the "success structure" they are exposed too, will be completely ungrateful for the fact they are towards the top over all i.e. someone who lives in new york, but does a menial office job who gets paid a decent salary, but is constantly surrounded by people who get paid more and work less, will have little or no thanks for the fact that pretty much the entire population of africa and a lot of south america and asia would kill to live his life. Philc TECI 16:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


True, you have to measure this in its context. I also largely agree with StuRat (oh shock), in that it's probably the middle class who are happiest. Alas many countries have a severe lack of middle class. Also, the middle class are the most productive part of an economy. But which echelon is the happiest? I suppose not the upper middle class, as StuRat suggests, but the middle middle class (?) because they are furthest from both the problems at the top and at the bottom.
A very satisfying thing is the knowledge that you've built what you have with your own hands. Having earned it (ie having earned the money to buy it) is a more modern economy version for which that principle also works. But I till think that having built something with your own hands is more satisfying. So the ideal would be something close to my grandfather and great grandfather (see Schunck), who, from scratch, built up a company that was the centrepiece of a town. My grandfather had a good start and ended up more at the top end. His father didn't have it easy when he was young, but his achievement was the greater for it. And therefore the satisfaction? I don't know.
Anyway, a problem is that that is not achievable for everyone (we can't all be exceptional) and happiness also depends on the happiness of your surroundings (so giving a little also helps). There is, however, yet another factor. People are different. Some people have a drive to build something big and are happiest when they get the chance (but particularly unhappy when they don't). Others are more laid back and happy with enough to get by. So there is no hard and fast rule as to which amount of what kind of success gives most happines.
Finally, let me point out that all this is about material success, but as I already pointed out above, whether you're happy, for whatever reason, is the best indication for success. So the two are very strongly related. A definitive answer at last. :) DirkvdM 07:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Only the richest people suffer from most of the problems of wealth, as it's impossible for them to keep their wealth hidden. Thus, a billionaire is likely to be hounded by the media, stalked by kidnappers, and have "friends" and relatives constantly begging for money. A mere millionaire, on the other hand, can keep their wealth hidden, live a comfortable but modest life, yet never have to worry about financial hardship. StuRat 08:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Flow (psychology) causes happiness, it may also result in success if you enjoy your business, as I do.

Sidenote: regarding millionaires - in the UK I do not think the equivalent of one million US dollars is enough for a comfortable life without working, since its onle equivalent to about £500000. A modest house in southern england would cost at least £250000. The £250000 left over would only give you £6250 per year income if invested in inflation-proof gilts at 2 1/2 %. £6250 is less than a quarter of the average income. So if you were a US$1M, you'd be poor! Ha ha. 81.104.12.44 11:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Geez, you've really got it bad there. A modest house in the US might cost about $100,000 (although much more in certain areas). StuRat 07:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Try living in southern California, mate [1]. True, in Minot, North Dakota, $130,300 would buy you a nice 2,200-square-foot house with 4 bedrooms, 2 ½ bathrooms, a family room and two-car garage. But Where i live, the same house would cost $1,708,333 - over 13 times as much. 100K wouldn't even buy you a studio here. Living in the most expensive market in the US sucks.... Guess who rents? :( Rockpocket 08:26, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Why do you wear your smiley upside down? Renting spreads out the cost (a good idea if you have to live off interest) and keeps you mobile - you can leave whenever you like. DirkvdM 07:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Steve Irwin videoclip.

Not to sound morbid, but is it possible the footage of Steve Irwin's death will be leaked and appear on sites like Youtube and Ogrish?

I was waiting for someone to bring this up. I sincerely hope the film never gets seen. Some things should be left alone. --Richardrj talk email 08:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Hear, hear! Durova 13:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Not unless one of his camera crew or the police investigating his death decide to leak. - Mgm|(talk) 09:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Investigating? Is every death "investigated" nowadays, no matter how obvious it was? —Bromskloss 09:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
It's certainly *possible* that the clip will be made public in the future. Probably via the usual journalist + police officer 'of negiotiable devotion to duty' route. --Kurt Shaped Box 09:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Some would say it's ghoulish or insensitive to want to see such a video, but I guarantee that if it became publicly available, there would be enormous interest in it from his admirers and others, which is hardly surprising. How often have we all seen the Zapruder film of JFK's head being shot away? It seems to be human nature to be attracted to horrific scenes, car smashes, shark attacks, death in any form etc. JackofOz 10:06, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Many people will watch it simply to see an arrogant fool die by the sword he lived by.
That seems a bit harsh, although I do agree that he was rather careless about safety. StuRat 10:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree with the anon. It was only a matter of time before his reckless behaviour towards wild animals for the sake of 'good TV' would lead to a sticky end and leave his children without a father. I know about all the conservation work he did but the guy always struck me as an overly-macho prat. --Kurt Shaped Box 10:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
An alternative point of view is that he was gradually being cajoled into undertaking more and more dangerous stunts by the TV companies, and being paid more and more money for taking risks that he might not otherwise have taken. If I were the TV producer who commissioned that stingray film, I'm not sure I would be able to sleep very soundly in my bed at the moment. Yes, I know he didn't *have* to do it, but sometimes it's difficult to refuse risky undertakings when a large cheque is being dangled in front of one's face. --Richardrj talk email 12:06, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
The guy took the ratings and money from the "good TV" and turned it into funds to benefit animals, the environment, and conservationism. He wasn't "macho" in the traditional sense—it was never, ever, about his "conquest" of the animals, it was always about admiring how strong they were, how important they were. His behavior towards the animals was never "reckless", and part of his constant message was that nature was worth respecting. Remember that TV makes things up to look as risky as possible—when he did die, it was because of a totally fluke accident, a one-in-a-million shot from what is normally a non-fatal stinger. It's really too bad he died like this; he did a lot of good work in education and conservation, and his silliness made it all the more exciting for children. As for the video itself; people are often drawn to the macabre, so it is no suprise that people might be interested in it, though I hope it gets sealed away somewhere. --Fastfission 17:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Whenever I saw his show, it seemed that his entire 'angle' was to antagonize otherwise-peacefully-minding-their-own-business animals into attacking him and *just* get out of the way of their jaws in time whilst grinning like a fool for the cameras. Based on current reports, it seemed that he annoyed the stingray too. --Kurt Shaped Box 18:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
What's ironic (?) is that he was apparently not engaged in particularly risky behavior at the time. This wasn't a case of pushing the limits for good tv. –RHolton≡– 13:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, getting killed by a stingray is probably about as unlikely as getting killed by a dolphin. Sure it can happen, but no one worries about it. Sure he increased his chances of being killed by an animal just due to his line of work, but that could be said about anyone. A firefighter has a greater chance than most of being killed by a fire but that doesn't mean that they are foolhardy. Nowimnthing 14:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
If Steve Irwin had been a fireman, he'd be one who deliberately started fires in order to charge in, put them out and emerge as the hero. --Kurt Shaped Box 17:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
KurtSB, I don't know where you are or what reports you've seen, but every report I've seen here, including the police media conference, says that there was no evidence that there was any antagonism going on, rather, Irwin was simply passively observing it. Some individuals have speculated he must have antagonised it, but those who've seen the video deny any such activity. (and for the record, I was never a fan of Irwin). JackofOz 20:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
According to what I've heard, and unless the story has changed in the last six hours, the ray was being 'boxed in' by Irwin and his cameraman. It's like trapping a rat in a corner - it's not a good idea, no matter how peaceful the creature is suppose to be. --Kurt Shaped Box 20:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I would expect everyone involved to deny any responsibility or blame, to avoid being sued by the family. However, as stingrays aren't aggressive animals, you really need to be way too close to them and annoying for them to sting you through the heart. Had he been at a respectable distance, it wouldn't have been possible for them to sting him at all. StuRat 00:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to interrupt all the needless nastiness about the dead guy, but the answer to the question is no. Irwin's manager has said that the tape will never see the light of day. [2] TheMadBaron 20:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Unconfirmed reports that it was shown on Queensland TV the night of his death. If so, I would be suprised if it doesn't find its way to the net pretty soon...Downunda 22:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I very much doubt that. If that were true, the extraordinary level of coverage his death received would guarantee the video would have been shown ad nauseam by now. JackofOz 22:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

It would be no worse than the videos of police chasing cars ending in fatal crashes which are shown every day on TV, or the videos of car suicide bombings on the news. Edison 23:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

People always find a way of leaking things. I expect the videos to leak out eventually. --Proficient 03:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Whereas I expect the footage to be returned to its rightful owner, and promptly destroyed. People do not always find a way of leaking things. People have only ever found ways of leaking those things that we've seen / heard about. Can you find Princess Diana autopsy shots on the internet? Police photographs of Jim Morrison lying dead in the bath? Kurt Cobain sans head? No? That's because they're not there. And that's good. TheMadBaron 09:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
I wouldn't put it past them to release a 'Crocodile Hunter: The Death of a National Hero' DVD.

[edit] Bad standards

Hello. I don't know where this question belongs, so I chose miscellaneous. There are some standards that seem virtually unchangeable, inspite of their relative inadequacy and inspite of improved suggestions at our disposition. I'm thinking of the QWERTY layout on keyboards, the hour/minute/second system, angular measurement, the calendar system etc. My question: Is there a word for these seemingly inefficient yet persistent standards? Thank you. Pat83.77.215.216 09:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if there's a word for it, sorry, but I'm curious what you feel is so inefficient about hours/minutes/seconds and the calendar. As for the QWERTY layout, it's not that way all around the world. Though I know what you're getting at. At this point it would be harder to get everyone to switch over to a differently standardized keyboard layout than it's really worth. Dismas|(talk) 09:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
The anon is not the only one to feel the calendar/time measure is inefficient. See Calendar reform, Swatch Internet Time and Decimal time. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
And Dvorak Simplified Keyboard. --LambiamTalk 11:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

For many things it's absolutely critical that there be a standard, but what the standard is is totally unimportant. For example, alphabetical order. It would be just as useful if the alphabet was arranged in any other order, but changing from the current order to another order would be extremely painful. The layout of the keyboard is one of these things. It might be slightly better if the keyboard was in alphabetical order, but dealing with the changeover would create all types of problems (for example, touch typists would need to learn to type all over). The French actually tried to change to digital time and dates during the French Revolution, but similarly found that the changeover was prohibitive. StuRat 10:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Albatross? --LambiamTalk 11:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I'd agree with StuRat about the importance of standards, except I'd say a particular standard might be arbitrary, but not unimportant. The chosen standard is what makes the particular order important. Btw, the French did introduce the French Republican Calendar, but abandoned it after 12 years of use. JackofOz 11:40, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, all, for responding. Dismas asked about which inefficiencies in time measurement I was referring to. CambridgeBayWeather has basically answered this question. Simple operations, such as calculating my age expressed in days, take me forever. Figuring out which date and day of the week it will be 200 days from now makes my head hurt. I may be somewhat challenged, arithmetically, but I have no difficulty comparing or adding, subtracting, and multiplying prices in Euros or figures expressed in units of the metric system. These challenges in calculating time keep our synapses busy and may be desirable. I was mainly curious on whether there was a word for this kind of standard. Pat83.77.215.216 12:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I think some people call this the "QWERTY phenomenon". In case you were wondering, 200 days from today will be Sunday, March 25, 2007. – b_jonas 14:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Richard Feynman in his book Surely You’re Joking makes the point that sin and cos and tan are not the best way to present a function because it looks like s times i times n. he perfered using symbles simmalar to a square root sign, which make clear that it is a function acting on something. Jon513 17:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes. THe word is traditional (or conventional)--Light current 18:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, days are the length they are, and so are years, not much anyone can do about that. It's built into fundamental astronomical facts about the Earth's rotation and orbit. I suppose hypothetically you could opt for a 100-day year, or a 1000-day year, but then you'd completely break the correspondence between the time of year and the weather/length of day. --Trovatore 20:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, CambridgeBayWeather for pointing out those articles to me. Though, I still don't mind the current system as I so seldomly care, much less need to know, what day of the week it will be however far off in the future or past. But then I guess that just makes me self centered... I can live with that.  :-) Dismas|(talk) 21:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't see how you come to that self-flagellatory conclusion. Go easy on yourself, Dismas.  :--) JackofOz 22:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
The transition from a current bad system to a better system is too much of a change to make it worthwhile in the short run. --Proficient 03:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Dismas, about the inadequacy of our timekeeping and other units and some possible solutions, see my user page. The keyboard layout could easily be personalised by mapping the keystrokes to characterfs differently. After all, some mapping has to be done, so why not give several options or even let people build their own preferences? A problem is that if you use a computer elsewhere you'd also have to be able to access that or you wouldn't be able to type anymore. But the mapping is done by the operating system, so if the major ones (Unix, Mac, msWindows) incorporate it (plus an option to download a personal layout) that solves that problem. It would be a minor adaption, I assume. The dvorak keyboard appears to be usable with the three big ones, so why not this? I use Ubuntu and it has an enormous amount of layouts, all organised by country (lots of redundancy, I suppose). Dvorak is under the US and UK versions. Not the best way to organise them. I suppose that's because it's a little known phenomenon. Do Mac and msWindows have this? DirkvdM 07:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

The Qwerty kyboard is an extremely intelligent design though, in that no commomly used letter pairs are next to each other in the keyboard, this minimises the risk of typos that pass spell check and editing. I cant see any more logical way to arrange it to be honest. 12 hour time periods, and hours devided into 12ths is also extremely intelligent, allowing for halfs thirds and quarters, a ten based system is actually relatively stupid, but prevailed because we have ten fingers. 60 seconds in a minute because again, it is a good length of time, it is easy to work with because it is about the shortest length of time the human mind can count in without being rushed, and also it fits in 12 groups of 5 into the clock face, back to the extremely sensibile 12ths again. To be honest, the problem is with our counting system having such a crap base, not our timekeeping system being odd. Philc TECI 10:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
It makes too much sense to have your units based on your nubering system, so then we should either change our numbering system and all other units or only change our time-unit(s). The former would be such a big change it would have to represent a huge advantage. And I don't see 'divisible by 2 and 3' as a huge advantage. And tehn there's the convenience that 103 is almost equal to 210.
The qwerty keyboard is designed to prevent people from typing too fast by relying heavily on the 'smaller fingers' (pinky and such), so the machine doesnt' get stuck. But we don't use those machines anymore, so that doesn't make sense. Then again, I just noticed it does have the advantage that it is easier to type 'qwerty'. :) DirkvdM 06:15, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, 'easily divisible by 2 and 3' can't be considered a good argument in favor to change to Base 12. Base 10 is 'easily divisible by 5'. Base 10 might not have many inherent advantages, either, except that for most people, I'd say it's easier to think in Base 10. 惑乱 分からん 10:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Thats only because you are acustomed to it. Philc TECI 17:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
True. From a mathematician's point of view. I guess both base 10 and base 12 are about equally arbitrary and "useful" standards. Using fractions, it's about equally difficult to divide 12 into 5, as 10 into 3. 惑乱 分からん 14:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
If instead of 24 hours a day, 60 minutes an hour, 60 seconds a minute, we went to 10 hours a day, 100 minutes an hour, 100 seconds a minute, it would be more efficient, and even a little more precise. Instead of 86,400 seconds a day, there would be 100,000 seconds a day — very nearly the same order of magnitude. — Michael J 17:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
It is the same order of magnitude.Its very nearly the same number as well 8-)--Light current 03:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
10 Hours a day is stupid though, because there are 4 significant points in a day, midday, midnight, when you get up and when you go to sleep. No one ever seems to pay attention to the fact that these times are perfect lengths, it is easy for a human to judge a second, a minute and an hour, because they are the right lengths for us to work with in our head, it is incredibly easy to count in seconds, because we are in tune with these measurements. 2.4 hours is a difficult time to judge in your head, so is 1.44 minutes, and so is 0.8 seconds. And yet these are the standardized lengths of time you intend to use. For example a train leaves the station every half hour, this is a good time, because there is never to longer time between trains leaving, without clogging up the system with too many tains on the same route, to maintain this level of service, they would have to leave every 0.2833333 or something hours, which is just annoyingly awkward. Philc TECI 22:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't think 0.8 seconds are harder to estimate than 1 second. If you think 2.4 hours are difficult to estimate, you could of course divide all the time into decimals to make smaller units that's easier to grasp. Another matter of accustomization. I don't propose a change, I just think that the system we have today is based on arbitrary choices, just as much as the proposal to change it.惑乱 分からん 14:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Ahh, but they're not random choices. Thats the thing. The most random of all the choices is using base ten as a counting system. Its possibly the worst even number possible. Philc TECI 15:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Firsst world war

Hello,

I would like to ask the help of anyone in trying to trace my grandad's service in the war. His name is Septimus Craggs and he served the whole war in the Royal Army Medical Corps. Any info would be appreciated. Thank you. --"""

I would start by trying the contact link at the bottom of the Royal Army Medical Corps site. They might be able to help with where to find the information or may even be able to provide it. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 11:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
A good place to look is the National Archives website. They have recently digitised the entire collection of WW1 medal records - my understanding is that pretty much everyone who served in that war received some kind of medal, so it's a very comprehensive database. I searched your granddad's name for you and came up with this. You have to pay a small fee and they will send you a scan of his original medal card. This will tell you about what medal(s) he was awarded and maybe some more details about where he served and so on. Hope this helps. --Richardrj talk email 11:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MySpace information.

I'm doing a speech on MySpace for my class, and I'm having trouble finding the following facts;

-On average, how many hits a day does MySpace have?

-Where is it ranked among website in terms of popularity?

Thanks, Tyler

Try Alexa. Here is their MySpace report [3]. Hope this helps. Skittle 14:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] poetry

I'm currently working on a challenging crossword puzzle and I'm hoping for either an answer or directions towards finding the answer. My question is what would complete this clue: Before, to a poet. Three letter answer E E with the middle letter missing. Any idea?

Thanks 68.226.188.185 17:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)Ellen

Ere. --Rallette 17:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Able was I ere I saw Elba. (Napoleon?)--Light current 18:45, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Where did the term 'El Jefe' come from?

Any help?

It's spanish for 'The Boss.'--24.250.33.247 20:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
From Spanish approximation of French "chef" (chief), I guess, ultimately from French sound change evolution of Latin caput (head). (Btw, this is a typical "language" reference question.) 惑乱 分からん 22:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unit Unvestment Trust Documents

There were documents on how to set up a unit investment trust on this site. Now i cannot find them. Please tell me where to go to locate that information.

Please reply to me at (email address redacted)

Thank you

Wikipedia's search engine isn't as sophisticated as google's. If you can't find the results you want using wikisearch, go to google and type 'wiki unit investment trust' which is quickest and should work. If that gives you too many answers try 'unit investment site:wikipedia.org' or some combination of these two. Rentwa 21:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
This query might help --Tagishsimon (talk)

[edit] What two colours make pink?

Serious question

Red and white? --Richardrj talk email 21:15, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Depends whether you are talking additve or subtractive color formation.(ie paint or filtered light)--Light current 21:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
In computer paint software; approximately Red 100%, Green 50%, Blue 50%, I'd guess. (In CMYK Magenta is basically Pink in itself.) 惑乱 分からん 22:21, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
In CMYK, about a 35% saturation of magenta plus a 15% saturation of yellow makes pink. Pantone "Sachet Pink" is M=50, Y=5 so there's quite a bit of gamut inside "pink". Sachet Pink in RGB is R=255, G=160, B=191. dpotter 02:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
What about the obvious link? Pink. That gives the RGB values 255, 192, 203. Another way of putting that is red plus white (experiment) plus a tiny bit of blue. DirkvdM 08:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disney/Dimension Films

Since October 1, 2005 Harvey and Bob Weinstein left the Walt Disney Company to make their own independant company taking Dmension films with them. Disney still has rights to join in for sequels to Scary Movie, etc.. but does Disney still own the rights to the rest of Dimension Film's Movies (Sin City, Brothers Grimm...)?

This was asked before. Check through the archives. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)