Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 May 16

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk 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 on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 16

Juliet and Paris

<moved from talk desk>
I'm doing a Code Lyoko spoof of Romeo and Juliet and I need help. What is the whole reason why Lord and Lady Capulet want their daughter to marry an older man like Count Paris? XANA (in human form) is playing the Count, and Sissi is Juliet. Angie Y. (talk) 02:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Because he is rich or he is a genius with computers (playing off the Xana thing you know since he was a computer program). They only want the best for their daughter. He might be able to help her with her homework. Or something completely and utterly ridiculous like: He will make them the best sandwiches if he gets their daughter. They just like him. Or: He is blackmailing them. (Since well Xana is an evil computer program.)71.142.222.245 (talk) 03:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven

Actually, Capulet is reluctant to let Paris marry his only surviving daughter. Paris reminds him that "younger than she are happy mothers made." Capulet decides he will leave it up to Juliet. Lady Capulet encourages Juliet to see if she "can love the man" at Capulet's party that evening. Juliet is willing to take a look, but as you know, she meets Romeo that night. It is the death of Tybalt that really inspires Capulet. He thinks a wedding might help his family recover from the loss, and it is only then that he orders Juliet to marry Paris. Mitchell k dwyer (talk) 16:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Other than the fact that Paris is a count (i.e. nobility title)... ~user:orngjce223 how am I typing? 03:24, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Capital Punishment

I am watching a show about capital punishment. And they show the methods used.One of the methods shocked me it horrified me. It risen some emotion in me. I can only imagine what that person went through. I know they are prisoner and they did something wrong, but just imagining that..just imagining it god its disgusting. How can we support something so disgusting? That isn't right even if the killer hacked a family into pieces. Murder isn't justice its cruel. You say murder isn't justice and say murder is wrong by law. And yet you murder someone for justice. Why do we spend our money on supporting this? What is so justice about capital punishment?

Thank You

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 04:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven

I think capital punishment is usually justified via the argument that, well, they intentionally made people involuntarily lose their lives, they can involuntarily lose theirs as well. It's the old "eye for an eye." Useight (talk) 06:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

You should not (continue to) use the reference desk as a soapbox. Please see Wikipedia's guidelines on the matter. If you wish to have your questions answered by an article, capital punishment looks long and locked, a good article then. 213.161.190.228 (talk) 07:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

And then consider joining or supporting Amnesty International. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 07:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Which does involve writing articulate, well argued letters Mhicaoidh (talk) 09:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Not necessarily. The letter-writing thing is important, sure, but not everyone has the time or inclination to do it. Becoming a paid-up member, or even just sending them a donation, is also a great help. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 10:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that Richard, but as a local organiser in my part of the world for AI, I can assure you that direct action remains essential to the central aims of the organisation. And secondly, I should try and remember that irony, although important to English as I understand and write it, is perhaps not part of the English language as it is used elsewhere in the world. Our colleague, the OP, if you do some research, does take quite some pride in his writing ability. If indeed it does exist, I suggest he could perhaps usefully use it there rather than here Mhicaoidh (talk) 12:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

How to reduce seat size?

Earlier I used to be very slim or I can call it lean also...but recently due to immediate sleeping after dinner & that too oversleeping caused me increase in belly & buttock size.... Immediately I started excersizing....

Simply laying flat on floor with both of my hands below my head & getting up & down...earlier it was painful 4 me but now the results are excellent...I reduced my belly considerably. That was good but now the problem lies in my seat. Not even an inch diffrence in it's size. So i came to know that there will be diffrent execize 4 buttocks reduction which i don't know. Can any one help me?

I need desperately an excersize which is intended especially towards this (seat). Plz help me. Don't prescribe walking. I know that well. Suggest something different! Temuzion (talk) 04:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

BUY AND RIDE A BIKE! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.86.15.15 (talk) 14:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Also take a look at what you are eating. Eating lots of unhealty food piles on the pounds just as much as taking no exercise. Astronaut (talk) 15:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

All the research I've seen says that there is no effective way to reduce the size of just one part of your body; the only way to reduce the size of your seat is to reduce your overall weight. There are many ways to do this, but most of them boil down to exercising more and eating smaller portions of healthy food while reducing or eliminating unhealthy food. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

It is good to balance the strengthening of opposing muscle groups. Since you have worked a great deal on your abdominal muscles, you might want to look into lower back exercises. Those stand a good chance of toning your gluteus maximus as well, though as others have said you should concentrate as much if not more on overall health and fitness. Maybe try starting with a good long walk each day. --Prestidigitator (talk) 17:00, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

world's youngest Phd

Who is the world's youngest Phd —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.52.152.41 (talk) 06:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Unless someone has beaten it, on March 8 2006 Yao-ban Chan received a Phd at the age of 21 in Australia[1]. -- Q Chris (talk) 08:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

This person became a professor at the age of 17, beating a 300 year old world record. Obviously she received her PhD before that age, although it's not clear on the resume. Sandman30s (talk) 10:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I looked at her too, and I am not sure that she did complete her Phd before becoming a professor. According to Alia Sabur "After Stony Brook, Sabur attended Drexel University where she received her M.S. in 2006 and is currently a Ph.D. candidate in Materials Science and Engineering." -- Q Chris (talk) 11:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC). It is unusual, though not unheard of, for University to appoint a professor who has not completed a Phd. -- Q Chris (talk) 11:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

But that is further complicated by the various meanings if the word "professor", which can mean anything from teacher or lecturer, to the academic chair of a department. The professorship is in Seoul; I, for one, have no idea of the term's usage there. Gwinva (talk) 20:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

This page says: "At 20, Ruth Gruber was the world's youngest PhD"; it looks like her article confirms that. --zenohockey (talk) 01:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Understanding

Can language ever be a complete impediment to understanding? Terror toad (talk) 12:09, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I would say anything but. Where are you going with this question? Even if we one day trancend into beings of energy without the need for verbal communication, surely we would still have a 'language' to convey messages to one another telepathically or in other ways? Language is one of the tools that sets us apart from lower life forms such as insects. Sandman30s (talk) 14:33, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Your question asks, in paraphrase, "Is language the only way to communicate?" Is that what you intended to ask? If so, the answer is, no, there are other ways to communicate, such as gesture and body language. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Clarify "understanding". See Zen. --Prestidigitator (talk) 17:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

You may be interested in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 19:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Language can certainly be a complete impediment to understanding. First, if you explain something to me in a language I have no familiarity with, my language is a severe impediment. Second, because language is a critical piece of the reasoning puzzle (think about how you talk yourself through difficult processes, or how you verbally recreate your steps when you've lost your keys), one's ability to think is influenced by his or her verbal ability. In this way, if one's language skills are poorly developed, the ability to think about abstract concepts (especially when those concepts are being taught via verbal means) is hindered. This is not necessarily true of every thought process (I think the understanding that eating is a response to hunger, for example, bypasses the need for language), but you did ask if language is "ever" an impediment. Mitchell k dwyer (talk) 16:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Bragging, showing off, legit self-marketing

Where is the line between bragging, showing off and legit self-marketing? GoingOnTracks (talk) 12:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Largely a matter of personal interpretation. Dictionary definitions may provide insight into brag, show-off, and marketing, however. — Lomn 13:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Puffery is the legal term for claims such as "the best coffee in the world". You might find our article useful, it refers to promotional statements and claims that express subjective rather than objective views, but which no reasonable person would take literally Mhicaoidh (talk) 01:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

What if, Stocks

just wondering... what this stock market would be like, if you have to hold whatever you buy for a day, (or, n days). :) --V4vijayakumar (talk) 13:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Obvious aswer: a whole lot more stable. Sounds like a good idea. Simple and effective. Amrad (talk) 14:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I wonder how much more stable. Partly it would depend on how it was interpreted, if I own £100,000 in Acme PLC and buy £10,000 then could I sell any shares in acme PLC that day? Also, I suspect that a lot of investment is by long term holders such as pension funds, so this ruling would not affect them. The added stability would depend on how much of the market is owned by short-term speculators. -- Q Chris (talk) 14:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I think a rule like this would have very little effect on stock market stability. Daily equities trading volume on the NYSE, for example, is roughly $100 billion but total value of issued shares is about $30 trillion i.e. daily trading volume is 1/300 of market size, so average duration of holding is more than a year. Also, speculators provide liquidity in a market, so they are not necessarily a bad thing. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, if you make investors take a buy-and-hold view, the amount they'd be willing to pay would be lower. It would be difficult to gauge the value of a stock in that case. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 14:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, so you'd be gauging a longer term value of stock in stead of short term (instant?). I suppose it depends on the sort of stock whether that is a good or a bad thing, although I'm not sure how.

But is it 'instant' now? No it isn't, but it's getting to be ever more instant, with the worldwide advance of information technology, giving you the details of the value of stock (I mean the real value, in the world out there) ever faster. The brake you propose would dampen the effects of, say, some disaster. I'm not familiar with the details of the stock market, but I can imagine that a disaster would propagate ever faster into the stock market(s), possibly causing a collapse that could bring down currencies to name but something) and make matters even worse. And what if it's largely a rumour and next day the disaster turns out not to be so disastrous after all? Would these positive effects be canceled out by any negative effects of not reacting fast enough? Of course, it's only part of the stock that would be affected by this, namely the stock that has been bought recently, but there would still be an effect. Amrad (talk) 07:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Central Europe

I was just looking at our article on Central Europe, and it appears to be embroiled in heated debate. As far as I can see from this and my own travels in the region, everyone want to be part of "Central Europe" and loath inclusion in "Eastern Europe" even though, when I were a lad, everything east of Germany was referred to as eastern Europe (at least here in Ireland) and Central Europe as a concept didn't get a look in. Do people from countries such as Romania, Poland and Slovakia all hate being referred to as "Eastern" Europeans? What is the stigma? Fribbler (talk) 13:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

One of the stigma is Russia and its history of oppression.86.200.4.67 (talk) 14:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)DT

Additionally there has been a long, long, LONG (centuries long) debate in and about the Eastern ("Asiatic") countries and whether they count as being truly "European" or not. Even Russia at times has wanted to claim it was a bit further "West" than its expansive geography would indicate, among those Westernization as the true ticket to "culture", anyway. (viz Westernization) --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 15:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Countries which formed part of Mitteleuropa (such as Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia) would naturally translate this into English as "Central Europe". SaundersW (talk) 18:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Living in Poland, when I hear "Eastern Europe" immediately Kazakhstan comes to my mind. And it's not a joke. Before 1990 it was pretty obvious for us that there was Western Europe vs Eastern Europe, and concept such as Central Europe was a no-no. Unrealistic, dubious, and somewhat disloyal to our Big Brother. Later most ex-Eastern Europe countries switched to being in Central Europe. People just wanted to get rid of a negatively loaded symbols. It came together with changing the country's name, changing the emblem, splitting the country (case of Czechoslovakia). The same motive, really. --Kubanczyk (talk) 21:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Isn't Kazahkhstan in Asia? I've always thought of Poland, Romania and so on as being in 'Eastern Europe'. Geographically speaking they always have been. I imagine by this process the next candidates for inclusion in 'Central Europe' will be the Baltic States, Moldova and the Ukraine. This new way of thinking would seem to be simply a way of isolating Russia (and Belorussia) behind a new Cordon sanitaire, a quite disturbing trend in geo-politics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugo McGoogle III (talk • contribs) 05:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The baltic countries would rather be part of Northern Europe or even the Nordic countries. But if you look at a map of Europe that covers the region from Ireland to the Urals, you see that Poland actually is in a central position. 84.239.133.86 (talk) 13:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Stick Shift

I've recently bought my first car, and I've decided that it would be one with a manual transmission. I've been driving the car for the past week, and I'm getting the hang of it, but I'm still have some questions about it that I'd like to ask here:

• How soon should I switch from 1st to 2nd after starting from a stop? I usually do it very soon (about 3 seconds) because I don't want to rev the engine too much.

• Is it OK to start from 2nd instead of 1st from a stand-still every time? I've heard it might wear down the transmission, is this true?

• Is it damaging to the transmission to play with the clutch and gas in 2nd gear while in heavy traffic that never stops completely? I usually let the clutch out half-way, put on some gas, and then put the clutch back in when the car in front puts on its brakes.

• When I have the clutch in all the way in in preparation for a stop, the stick shows a reluctance to slide into 1st that it doesn't have when the car isn't moving. Is this normal?

• Bonus question: How do I make bullet points on this page so that this doesn't look so ugly?

Thanks in advance, again. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 15:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Your clutch is slipping whenever it's in some halfway position. This is by design, but excessive clutch-slipping does cause premature wear. When to shift is going to be largely up to you. Shift too soon, and maybe the engine bogs down if the car has insufficient power. So you don't want that. Shift too late and you're wasting gas, which you probably don't want either. If you can do a second-gear start and the car has sufficient acceleration (and you don't have to slip the clutch excessively), go for it. I start in second all the time and it's a piece of cake because I have a very torquey car. Yes, it's normal that it resists going into first if you're not stopped. Don't try to go into first (or any gear) if it doesn't seem to want to. If you're rolling, second is generally what you want, unless the car is too underpowered to make this practical. Hope this helps. Friday (talk) 15:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

• Use * for bullets. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 15:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for that, Zain, I didn't know it was that simple. Also, my car is...overwhelmingly powerful, so I'll take Friday's advice of starting in 2nd. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 16:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't you consider slope? I would imagine that starting in second on an uphill would be a bad idea? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 16:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

There is a place on the route back from my workplace that has a slope and heavy traffic. I find no problem climbing up it. However, it isn't much of a slope. I don't worry about slopes or hills too much around here since this place is more flat than a run-over flapjack. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 16:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, you bought a very powerful manual car for your first one? What did you get? Good luck with that.. :) Friday (talk) 16:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, first car I bought, my previous one was given to me. I got a 2006 Mini Cooper S that had a supercharger installed by the previous owner. I'm not used to getting to 60 MPH so fast, so I sometimes don't realize it - I'll have to be careful to avoid speeding tickets. I'm asking these questions because I don't want to harm the little thing. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 16:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

The owner took the factory supercharger off and put a different one on?!? Weird. But, it sounds like a good car to learn on. Basically, don't try to force it into a gear and you're unlikely to hurt anything. Even revving it "too high" won't likely hurt it- all you're doing is wasting gas. Friday (talk) 16:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Since, as you note, the 2006 MINI Cooper S came from the factory with a supercharger (at least mine did!), I wonder if the previous owner actually just changed the supercharger pulley, to spin the supercharger faster and develop more boost. This is a common and inexpensive modification. -- Coneslayer (talk) 16:57, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

He actually outright replaced it, I still have the old one in my trunk (it looks to have nothing wrong with it). It belonged to a rich man, so who knows what his motives were. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 18:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Let me repeat and emphasize Friday's advice. NEVER keep the clutch pedal "partially depressed" for more than a half-second or so. If the clutch is slipping, it's getting hot and that heat will permanently damage the clutch quite fast. Push the clutch pedal all the way down or choose an appropriate gear (or neutral) and let it all the way up. Treated right, a clutch will last at least 200K miles (I've done it three times). Treated badly, a clutch won't last ten minutes.

Atlant (talk) 17:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, very important. I've often told people learning to drive a stick, that given the choice between roasting your clutch and your tires, go ahead and roast your tires. They're not meant to last all that long anyway, and changing them is way easier than putting in a new clutch. Friday (talk) 19:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Another way to put it: brakes are cheaper than clutches. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 21:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

• When you're not racing, roughly 3 seconds of consistent acceleration sounds right. I've never driven a Mini before, but you should shift around the 2000-4000 RPM range for everyday driving.

• It's OK to start from 2nd gear instead of first, however, if the situation permits it, why not start from 1st? Even though your car may have enough engine torque to accelerate smoothly in 2nd gear without slipping the clutch excessively, starting from 1st will allow you to accelerate just as smoothly, but slipping the clutch for a shorter period of time. Of course, there are those adverse conditions, such as on a slippery winter road, where starting from 2nd is beneficial, sometimes crucial, as the 2nd gear offers a smaller torque multiplication. Hence, less torque will see the wheels and should reduce wheelspin.

• Depending on how much you do it, it could be damaging to the clutch. Automatics are better than manuals in this respect because they move when you take your foot of the brakes and slipping an automatic isn't damaging to its torque converter to the best of my knowledge. Alternatively, what I can recommend is slipping the clutch just a little bit and give it a bit of gas, then fully depress the clutch or shift into neutral and let you car slide forward slowly. If the traffic is moving at a slow, but constant pace, what you can do is slip the clutch until the friction point, then let go of the clutch while on first gear and don't give it any more gas. Your car should still move forward, given that you are traveling on a level road, but at a very slow pace.

• Yes, I've noticed this too. I'm not sure about this answer to this, does anyone know?

Acceptable (talk) 23:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

With regard to the final (non-bonus) question, the reason your transmission is reluctant to easily shift into first gear while you're still moving is the fact that, to engage a gear, the gears-to-be-engaged must be rotating at the appropriate proportional speed. As you shift gears, there are mechanisms in modern "synchromesh" transmissions that uses frictional coupling to accerate or decelerate the gears so that their speeds are appropriately proportional. These mechanisms (called "synchronizers") also prevents the gears from engaging until their speeds are correct; they "balk" the engagement while the speeds don't match. If you try to shift into first gear while you're still rolling along, the synchronizer has to work very hard to accelerate the transmission's input shaft to a very high speed (RPM) before it can let the first-gear gears engage. (Think about how fast your engine would have to be turning if you were engaged in first gear and rolling along at that speed; the transmission's input shaft has to turn just that fast for the first gear to successfully engage.) Higher gears are proportonally easier to engage because the transmission's input shaft doesn't have to accelerate nearly as much.

Bottom line: don't engage first gear while you're rolling fast; wait at least until youre nearly stopped or you'll wear out the first-gear synchronizer prematurely.

Our manual transmission#Synchronized transmission article helps explain synchromesh.

Atlant (talk) 14:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Commercial flight paths

Is there a good website where I view the path (on a map) and distance of commercial flights between 2 cities? I am not looking for a route map of a particular airline. I am more interested in the actual path that an airline flies (i.e., exactly which direction it goes and which places it flies over). A coworker once showed me website like this but I can't seem to remember the name.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 16:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe have a look-see in here [2]? Fribbler (talk) 17:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

No, that's not what I'm looking for.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 17:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

There was one or two on that list that promised flight paths, but I didn't test them. Fribbler (talk) 18:51, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good candidate for a new article, or at least material for some existing ones (e.g. Airway (aviation)). Oh, and also note that the shortest distance between two points on a sphere is a great circle, though the Earth isn't quite a sphere (I believe long distance commercial flights often follow--possibly modified--great circles). --Prestidigitator (talk) 17:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

To visualize great circles, see this great circle mapper. -- Coneslayer (talk) 17:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

This is helpful. I dialed up a map from New York to Hong Kong just now. Presumably, this is the shortest flight distance between the two cities. But does it really resemble the path that commercial flights between those two cities actually follow?--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 17:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

No, the actual path will depend on factors like winds (which vary from day to day), and requirements to stay within a certain range of airports in case of emergency (see ETOPS). -- Coneslayer (talk) 18:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

That's what I expected. I'm still looking, then, for a way to see typical, real-life flight paths (preferably without having to figure a real flight number, etc.), but perhaps such a map does not exist.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 18:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

If you are acquainted with aviation in general then this site may be of some use to you. You just put in the ICAO code of the airport and press "Find Route". SID and STAR in the route means Standard Instrument Departure and Standard Terminal Arrival Route, respectively, and those depends on the active runway and a variety of other factors. I use it to generate my flightplan for flightsim but you can just plot the longitude/latitude of each way point to see roughly what path they take. --antilived^{T | C | G} 00:21, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Free flight (air traffic control) may tend to make flight routes even more variable. Rmhermen (talk) 13:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

"digital camo" artwork nightmare

ive been having trouble lately with the us army digital camo pattern and colour blend, i mainly use shading and colour pencils but i also use oil pastels from time to time, but im finding it hard to master the digital camo in my drawings (as it ends up as a mess) than the regular camo that you see everywhere. Can anyone give advice and tips (even examples of your work!) on how draw/shade the camo?

(BTW: its the greyish ACU camo design - argh i really need some help!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.15.119 (talk) 17:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

It is obvious to you what you are talking about, but without a bit more background you'll have to wait for someone who has encountered exactly the same problem doing exactly what you've been doing. That seriously limits the pool of people able to help you. So to clarify 1. Are you trying to produce a camouflage pattern? 2. You are trying to do so on your computer or on paper (not printed out)? 3. If on the computer, what program do you use to produce your drawings? 4. If on paper could you specify your problem a bit more.--71.236.23.111 (talk) 01:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

He or she is talking about Universal Camouflage Pattern or a similar pattern, which has a pixellated appearance. See also MARPAT, CADPAT. -- Coneslayer (talk) 01:28, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

To visually analyse the division of ground, check out the techniques of the Cubists, grandaddies of them all. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:24, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I found this[3] to give you a "map". Found instructions that go like this: work from light to dark. Choose three shades/colours in low contrast tones; first cover the area in the lightest, add patches of the middle tone wherever and finally, patches of the darkest. The image is a good guide for what this all means. With the medium you're using, layering is not so easy to do since they don't cover each other so well as paint, so a good idea is to use the colours in light strokes, then work back over to strengthen anything you want visible in the final sketch. Careful not to "blend" but keep some edges in those pixel shapes. If you have trouble with the shapes, you could use some of that schoolbook paper with small squares, or lightly pencil a grid over the whole sheet area for camo first. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:51, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

great advice guys, thanks for the help :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.66.173 (talk) 21:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone know?

Does anyone know the name of that american website where you fill out lists?

Quidom (talk) 18:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Need a bit more than that. Lists of what? Fribbler (talk) 18:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Craigslist ? StuRat (talk) 00:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

On a related note, does anyone know that one place where you do stuff? Ziggy Sawdust 01:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Life?  :-) Astronaut (talk) 07:22, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, it's right next to the other, and links here and even there.

Seriously, I would simply do a websearch for "filling out ists" or, "Lists" and "fill" or some synonym.209.244.30.221 (talk) 14:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Lists of Bests? --zenohockey (talk) 02:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Macintosh commercial

I saw a Macintosh commercial yesterday where they claim that Apple notebooks are outpopulating or outselling PC notebooks on college campuses. Is there any real basis to this or is it based on the Amazon chart talked about in this blog? I can't find any real figures to support or disprove this. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 20:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I doubt they're lying, but it's probably a bit misleading, too. If some certain model of Macbook is outselling some certain model of Windows PC, this doesn't mean much. When Macs as a whole start outselling Windows machines as a whole, then that's very significant. Friday (talk) 20:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Apple has always focused on providing computers to educational institutions, so it wouldn't be a great surprise if they had achieved the majority of sales in "their own backyard". StuRat (talk) 00:41, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Redeeming Air Miles

I have some Air Miles, and a question about redeeming them. Will I get the best value if I spend them on travel; small merchandise such as CDs or grocery certificates; or large merchandise such as a laptop? Also, will 1000 miles buy the same things a few years from now as it will today, or can I expect my miles to deflate? I live in Canada, if it makes a difference. NeonMerlin 21:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

It's difficult to tell the future or how any particular airline will run it's rewards program. However, a company can intrinsically offer better prices on goods or services they provide themselves than on those they must buy from other companies. In this case, since the airlines can obtain airline tickets at low prices, they could theoretically offer you better rewards in that form than any other. This would be especially true if they give you tickets they can't sell otherwise. (Those aren't necessarily bad tickets, they may just have an overcapacity for a certain flight and want to ditch the extra tickets.) I would also expect the value of any such plan to deflate. Then, later on, they may add a "Silver Air Miles" program with better rewards, which then deflate until they offer "Golden Air Miles", "Platinum Air Miles", etc. So, my advice is to "use 'em while you got 'em". You can also use the Internet to determine the value of any reward they offer, provided they give you info like the model number of the laptop. If they don't give out such info, I'd interpret that to mean that the rewards are cheap crap and they want to keep that fact hidden. StuRat (talk) 00:37, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The Dark Ages

I've heard people say that "such and such will cause the world/country to regress back to the dark ages" about many different subjects before. What exactly does this mean and why do people think the dark ages were such horrible times? 69.40.251.89 (talk) 21:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

There was greater ignorance (because of the lack of printed works), short life expectancy, no antibiotics, bad teeth, lousy plumbing, harsh penal system, etc. The list is long. MilkFloat 23:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

The remarkable thing about the Dark Ages was that a great deal of knowledge in possession of the Greeks and Romans and other ancient cultures was lost following the fall of Rome, and it took over 1000 years to regain most of it. Some of that knowledge, like the techniques used to build the pyramids, may have been lost forever. It seems bizarre that the world could just throw away knowledge, but it did, when the invading "pagan" armies destroyed Greek and Roman libraries, etc. StuRat (talk) 00:24, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I think the Dark Ages were cool; the world ruled by headstrong young people with little or no constraints of modern morality! I would do it! JeanLatore (talk) 01:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I understand the loss of knowledge and poor standard of living, but why are the dark ages used a symbol of "intolerance" or "immorality". 69.40.251.89 (talk) 03:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, later in the Dark Ages, the Catholic church became dominant and tortured and/or killed anyone who got in their way or disagreed with the Pope. Read up on The Crusades to get some idea how they behaved. Meanwhile, the Popes were themselves engaging in all sorts of immoral behavior, since they were completely "above the law". This highly immoral behavior continued into the Renaisaance with the infamous House of Borgia. StuRat (talk) 05:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

You should have asked your question on the Humanities Desk. I'm sure Clio the Muse would give you a really knock-out answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugo McGoogle III (talk • contribs) 05:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

It's largely hype. Sure, we've got more luxury now, but things weren't that bad and they weren't that much better before either. And the Romans weren't that civilised either. Conquering the 'world', crucifiction, wiping out those who opposed - they were the real barbarians, one might argue. Admittedly, I'd rather be crucified than burned at the stake, but that wasn't quite a daily occurrence and neither was witch hunting. I believe the death penalty (if any) was more commonly done through beheading, and I'd certainly prefer that to crucifiction (the choices one gets to make here at the ref desk :) ). And people were fairly healthy and independent, not bothered by the ruling classes provided they paid their taxes (what's new?). I must admit, though, that I got most of my knowledge on this from [Terry_Jones#As_an_author|Terry_Jones]]. :) Amrad (talk) 08:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

It is worth noting that the European dark age was the gold age of Arabia (Arabia used as a wide term), seeing polymathic scientists being born quite often. See Islamic science for an equally thorough investigation of their merits during this time. The movement would give the foundation to much of today's basis of medicine, optics and so forth. Scholars interested in the subject (European scientists may be somewhat introvert, unintentionally, unaware of the Arabian and Indian findings) accredit the Arabians with an early scientific method, and the development of a scientifically based examination of hadiths is worth taking a look at. Some contest that people like Ibn al-Haytham really provided this much 'reason' into science, while others claim him to be the first scientist. Whereas Greek 'science' is primarily of a reasoning nature, that of Islam is far closer in approach to our modern scientific method. The dark ages is really, therefore, limited to what happened in Europe. I digress. Also take into account that some cultures in Europe would only begin to flourish at this time. Scaller (talk) 09:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Clio is no longer active (supposedly) but the middle ages are pretty well covered on the Humanities desk. The simple answer has already been given; people think there was a "dark ages" and that it was technologically and socially backwards. However, historians don't use that term anymore, it is now referred to as the early Middle Ages, and it wasn't that bad, just different. (Note also that the examples StuRat gave are consistent with the stereotypical idea of the middle ages, but really have nothing to do with the "dark ages"!) Adam Bishop (talk) 16:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd sure like to see any evidence you have that the Dark Ages (or early Middle ages, if you prefer) were a period of rapid intellectual growth in Christian Europe. StuRat (talk) 14:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

You'll find some at Dark Ages, Early Middle Ages, Science in the Middle Ages, Medieval technology, Medieval philosophy and so forth. Gwinva (talk) 20:21, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Right. Also, StuRat, I meant that many of the things you mentioned took place many centuries after the "dark ages". Adam Bishop (talk) 07:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for all the great answers. 69.40.251.89 (talk) 20:04, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Clean after you dog

Is there any non-humiliating way to clean your dog poo? Or should I always bend and collect it with a plastic bag and my own hand? GoingOnTracks (talk) 18:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

You're not actually touching the poo with your bare hand, I hope. There are many ways to avoid having a "brown thumb". Turning a thick plastic bag (or several thin bags) inside out on your hand, grabbing the poo through the bag(s), then turning the bag(s) back right-side out with the poo inside is one way. Stores also sell "pooper scoopers" which allow you to pick it up without touching it or bending down. StuRat (talk) 00:17, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

There is nothing humiliating about picking up your dog faeces in urban or protected areas. It is the right, decent and considerate thing to do. Just imagine it was you or a young relative that stepped into some other dog's excrement and the social value of your action becomes clear. Richard Avery (talk) 07:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

He's not asking if he should do it, but how he could do it more elegantly, because indeed collecting a fresh dog's turd isn't the most pleasant thing to do. Btw, I always look at the dog when I see someone do that. They seem quite bewildered by what must look to them like very odd behaviour indeed. Amrad (talk) 08:00, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Be cool my friend, I was trying (obviously badly) to suggest that he should not think of it as humiliating but a socially worthy thing to do. Clearly the OP feels humiliated by this action and it was my intention to suggest he should not feel this way. I'm sorry, I failed pedantry at school. Richard Avery (talk) 16:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Anecdotal recommendation to make the inside-out bag technique more effective: as you're bringing your own bag, fill it in advance with a handful of loose, dry dirt or sand. You shake this over the droppings before picking them up to make the surface less sticky and slightly less unesthetic all around. Next question would be whether there are bags for this purpose made of a biodegradable material...? (Afterthought: the sand drying the surface would be even more effective for p-scooper users preferring to avoid any sticky remnants on the implement's contact surface...) -- Deborahjay (talk) 07:33, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

A note on the biodegradable bags issue: This would be a good way to go if you need to buy new bags. However, as most people already have more than enough excess plastic bags, from the grocery store, loaves of bread, packaging materials, etc., it doesn't make environmental sense to go out and buy more biodegradable bags in addition to dumping all those extra bags in a landfill. Reuse trumps biodegradability, in this case. StuRat (talk) 14:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

At Dragon's Den (or something similar) I saw someone present a tube with a bag at the end, that you can place over the poo, after which it gets 'sucked' into the bag with some operation at the other end of the tube (forgot the details). You can then drop the bag in a dustbin or something without ever touching it, bending over, or having a dirty tool. Only disadvantage was that it was rather big, so the inventor said it was mostly for use in your own back yard. Which was largely why he didn't get an investment, if I remember correctly. Amrad (talk) 08:00, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I remember watching a TV program where the dogs wear a diaper like clothing. I don't know what its name though.--Lenticel ^(talk) 13:52, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I doubt if the idea is for the animal to poo in those (unless it's lost control of it's bowels, perhaps), as that would be uncomfortably for the dog and for whoever has to change the diaper. Unspayed female dogs can drip blood when menstruating, so that might be the use of the diapers for an inside dog. StuRat (talk) 14:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I have kids who play outside in the local fields and parks. Thank you very much for continuing to pick up what your dog deposits. Far from being humiliating, your behaviour is responsible and thoughtful, and it is noted and appreciated. -- Karenjc 22:22, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Apart from being responsible with respect to other humans, picking up also helps dogs, because stepping in dog feces is a sure way to create dog-haters. --Sean 13:37, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I have never put in question if people have to pick up dog feces. I just asked if there were an easier way to accomplish it. GoingOnTracks (talk) 23:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Engine oil for Lawnmover

My lawnmower began leaking out a dark brownish engine oil the other day and after I checked the reading, the level dropped to a dangerously low amount. I have a bottle of motor oil for internal combustion engines, a much lighter colour, comparable to the colour of vegetable oil. My question is, can I use this motor oil for my lawnmower- which apparently used a darker engine oil? Thanks Acceptable (talk) 23:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Engine oil routinely starts that nice light amber color, but turns disgusting brown after a relatively short time running in an engine (whether automobile or lawnmower). The only question you really need to answer is: "With what weight (viscosity) oil should you refill your lawnmower?" Our motor oil article may help you there. But if it's an old lawnmower, well then any weight oil is better than too little oil.

Atlant (talk) 23:43, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Obama

Is Obama going to be assassinated if he wins? (since he's the first black president) I don't want him to be, but will he be? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.227.106.231 (talk) 23:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I doubt anyone on the RefDesk will be able to provide you with an accurate answer. Despite best efforts, we can not predict the future. I'm sure that should Obama win the presidency, he will be well protected by his Secret Service detail. Acceptable (talk) 23:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, today, Mike Huckabee seemed to be encouraging that sort of behavior, but maybe the Secret Service will help him understand and repent the error of his ways.

Atlant (talk) 23:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Just as no one on the left would dare assasinate Bush, thanks to the man would replace him, Obama could make himself assination-proof by choosing a nightmare-scenario-for-the-right vice-president. I can think of a few. --Sean 13:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC)