Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2007 June 30

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.

June 30

ayatollah progression

how much time does it take to ba a hojetal islam (and then an) ayatollahand finally a grand ayatollah (marja)? in years
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Zulkifil (talk • contribs) 04:26, 30 June 2007

It appears time is not the deciding factor, therefore there is likely to be a range of times depending on the circumstances of the individual. You could always choose one from our List of ayatollahs and List of marjas, and ask them via their website. For example, the website of Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah is here. Rockpocket 00:17, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Dying parakeets

My parakeet got very sick recently and died... What was strange was that he actually sang right before he he did. I heard him making some strange noises and went to check on him, and he was dead. It sound almost like a swan song. I do know for certain he was the one making the noise because he was within a few yards of me. Has anyone else ever heard of anything like this? --ParakeetSong 08:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

You say he sang right before he died, but then you say he made 'some strange noises'. So, was it singing or strange noises? The singing would be more interesting, the strange noises would be more likely and could literally be his 'last gasps' perhaps. I fear you'll never be certain of the answer to this unless you've recorded it, as you will probably and understandably, even if only subconsciously, choose to remember it as 'singing'. --jjron 13:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the loss of your pet. Perhaps the bird was saying goodbye, and expressing his affection for you, just as a dying person might. Edison 20:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, he was extremely ill, so I doubt that even if he wanted to sing he could. It's hard to explain... I know for certain it was not his normal singing (it was more of squawking), but I get the impression that he was trying to sing, which is why I was indecisive between the two. --ParakeetSong 00:20, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Distances between cities in Thailand

Where can I get a chart of cities in Thailand with the distances between them?

Leonard Levine praglenus@yahoo.com

It depends what you mean by a chart. Have you tried something like the relevant Lonely Planet guidebook? That should give you the distances between cities and some reasonable maps. Or try a Google search for it if all you need are the distances. --jjron 13:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Eighth amendment

That question a few days ago about bails got me thinking... If the "excessive bail" prohibition in practice means basically nothing, what about the "excessive fine" prohibition? Could you be fined a million dollars for stealing a pack of gum? I assume that each city has its own rules on jailtime/fines for petty crimes, but if they passed a law removing a maximum fine, could that be attacked under the Eighth Amendment? Or another example, I've read that the RIAA sues for $150,000 for each act of copyright infringement, and our article says that they sued AllofMP3 for $1.65 trillion coming from that 150,000 number. If you were sued for $150,000 for sharing one song, could you challenge that based on the "excessive fine" prohibition in the Eighth Amendment? zafiroblue05 | Talk 15:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

In many respects, you are confusing apples with oranges. Number one -- remember that the Eighth Amendment (and the entire Constitution, for that matter) restricts the actions of those in an official governmental capacity, and not the actions of private individuals (or corporations, etc.). Number two -- I think you are confusing the definition of the word "fines." Fines are imposed by the government (example, I got a $100 fine for speeding on the highway). When individuals (or businesses) sue others, that is not a fine. If they win the suit, they are awarded "damages" (or, money) -- this is called an award or a damage award. It is not a fine imposed by the government on a person. Hope this clears up some of your questions. (JosephASpadaro 18:12, 30 June 2007 (UTC))

However, as a matter of civil claims, damage awards can be deemed as excessive and violate due process. See, for example, BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore (1996). The Supreme Court hasn't said what amounts would violate due process as a rule, just that certain multiples and amounts are too much. And now that I do a little looking, in 1998, in United States v. Bajakajian, the Supreme Court held that a fine of $357,144 for transporting more than $10,000 was excessive and disproportionate. –Pakman044 18:35, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree that damage awards can be held to be excessive. However, that has nothing to do with the Eighth Amendment. I think the original question was getting at excessive fines (via the Eighth Amendment) rather than excessive damages (via due process). In summary, can the government fine you a million dollars for stealing a pack of gum? No. This would certainly be held to violate the Eighth Amendment. (JosephASpadaro 20:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC))

Speaking of excessive fines, coincidentally this was in the news today (Virginia Begins $3,000 Traffic Ticket Fines): [1] (JosephASpadaro 18:03, 1 July 2007 (UTC))

learning ability in educational vs casual setting

May be its a personal experience, why is it that one is able to learn and remember facts more easily when the subject does not belong to educational curriculum?. Why is it that learning ability goes down when preparing for the exam?

It's very much to do with personal interest. You learn things you're interested in far more easily. If you're more interested in facts about your favourite band or sports trivia than your current history or science topic at school, then you'll be more engaged with the subject, your mind won't drift off onto other 'more interesting' things, and you will remember things more easily. Same as you'll tend to more easily learn subjects in formal education that you find interesting than those you're bored by. That's the main reason for the (at times misguided and counterproductive) push for student engagement in education. Also of importance is the level of knowledge and degree of accuracy expected, which can be far higher in formal education, and therefore harder to attain.

Re the second question, learning ability could seem to go down when preparing for exams for several reasons, e.g., trying to learn too much in too short a time period, unfocussed approach to learning or revision as opposed to during formal classes, tiredness at the end of a long semester, and simple fear and panic about the looming exam deadline. --jjron 19:03, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your answer. This is a difficult question: how to create/increase intrest?

You're welcome. Are you actually asking this now as a second question? If so, it could be taken in two ways - how can the educational institution or teacher create/increase interest, or how can the student do so.

For the first interpretation, as I said above, there is a push for schools/teachers, etc to act on increasing student engagement by, for example, using more engaging and a wider variety of teaching methods, or catering to student interests (for example by relating your maths topic to say a sporting interest). However, as I also said above, this can at times be misguided and counterproductive, and is certainly not always easy to do when teaching a class who themselves have a wide range of interests.

For the second interpretation, well that is largely a personal issue that the student must resolve for themself, although they could seek guidance. They could try to generate interest by, for example, looking to the long term benefits of what they are learning rather than the immediate seeming irrelevance. They could themselves try to relate topics to their own inherent interests rather than expecting the teacher to do this for them. Or they could concentrate on areas in formal education that do interest them (which is basis of the advice of careers counsellors, etc, that tell you to 'follow your heart', or however they may choose to word it, and not try to follow some course because your parents have told you to do it, because your friends are doing it, or because you think it will earn you a big pay packet in the end). --jjron 13:00, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with jjron. Therefore the problem for you--the student--is to develop an interest in the subject matter of the courses you are taking. First, I would suggest that you try to change what may be your basic attitude toward academic subjects--that by definition they are boring and irrelevant to "real" life. This is simply not the case--it is one of those unfortunate stereotypes that exists in popular culture. Second, find something on the subject matter that IS interesting. For example, if you are studying geography, find a travel book or an adventure book and follow the action on maps. If you are studying history, find a historical novel or movie that covers the period you are studying. It doesn't have to be accurate--just lively and interesting. If you are studying mathematics or logic, get a book of puzzles or brain teasers and start working on them. If you are studying biology, read a popular science book on the subject--like those by Dan Dennett or Richard Dawkins. If you are studying physical science, start reading hard science fiction. And so forth--you get the idea. It might be difficult to find something from popular culture that you both find interesting and is relevant to your course matter, but that's just the kind of thing the wikipedia reference desk is good at! Good luck!--Eriastrum 22:29, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Vans

My white Vans slip-on shoes (thus made from fabric) are pretty dirty after it rained. Any idea on how to clean them? I'd prefer not to put them in the washing machine. Thanks, 86.150.29.74 17:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

• I always washed my white tennies by hand in a bucket filled with a warm,soapy solution,rinsed thoughoughly then hung on a line to dry.hotclaws 00:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

The Last Name Graves?

What can you tell me about it? --Kaia0 17:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

The Graves (surname) page says that it is of English origin, and lists a whole bunch of famous people with that last name. I couldn't find anything about the origin of the name (other than that it is English). I would guess that it comes from a profession related to graves, perhaps a gravedigger or the owner of a cemetery. --Tugbug 20:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Ancestry.com claims that it is either a patronymic from the name Grave, meaning a steward, or a name given to anyone who lived on a patch of gravelly soil. [2] Laïka 22:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

It seems surprising - but surnames are often derived from such bizarre details as the nature of the soil one happened to live on. Many (perhaps most) English surnames date back to a very specific moment in history sometime beofre 1086 - when the Domesday book was created. The Kings men went around cataloging everything in sight- and demanding unambiguous names for people. If there were five guys in a particular village all called 'Steve' - they needed to know which one was which - so "Steve the Baker" (evidently some long lost ancestor of mine!) was forced to give his name in full and, being an unimaginative chap, said "Steve Baker" rather than "Steve Studmuffin"...probably a good thing really. Hence, lots of names do relate to occupations - and in the event of two farmers being called "Steve", you might well end up being "Steve, that guy who farms the gravelly land over there"...hence (with a few dozen generations of misspellings) "Steve Graves". You can still see the same process in action in parts of Wales where in some small communities there are a lot of people with identical names - so you'll hear "Jones the Post" is the postman and "Jones the Bread" runs the bread shop. These come very close to adding a third part to people's names. SteveBaker 01:53, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Question about cable television

I live in San Francisco, CA, and I currently have analogue cable television service and I split the line and have it go to 3 televisions in my house. Comcast is my cable provider in this area. I'm getting an HDTV next week, and I'd like to get HDTV programming. My questions are:

1) If I want to do it through Comcast, do I have to upgrade my service to some kind of digital service, and also add HD service? What would the price difference be compared to my analogue service?

2) If I do have to upgrade to digital and get those set top boxes from Comcast, would I have to get one for each TV? Or could my old TVs still receive the analogue signal?

3) Is it worth the hassle to try to get over the air HDTV channels or should I just do it through Comcast? Thanks. --Rc251dc 19:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[[www.comcast.com] can tell you everything about prices. Comcast digital service can be used with a set top box supplying the signal to one set and another set directly connected to the cable at another location in the house, with a one-time fee for Comcast to install the splitter and outlet. They would charge more money for an upgraded set top box to provide HD service (I do not yet have HD). Can't comment on over the air versus cable HD, except that with cable HD you would have many more channels of movies etc available in HD than the plain vanilla broadcasts of the over the air. I think (depending on location) that you would need a decent antenna to get HD. HD as a digital signal would probably be there or not there at all, and would not just be present with snow, ghosts, interference, etc like analog TV. If I owned an HD receiver I would pay for the cable service, because I like the on-demand features and the premium programming, and the pay per view movies. Edison 20:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Precision shot from 2200 yards

In the film Shooter, starring Mark Wahlberg, the Archbishop of Ethiopia is assassinated by a sniper from about 2200 yards. In real life, is it possible to hit a human sized target with a .50 caliber sniper rifle from a distance of 2200 yards? Thanks. Acceptable 19:56, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/armyweapons/a/m107.htm - which comes out to about 2188 Ft. So yes, it would be possible, although it would probably take a good marksman --_ʇuǝɯɯoɔɐqǝɟ 20:07, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

You mean yards, not feet, right? Friday (talk) 20:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that --_ʇuǝɯɯoɔɐqǝɟ 20:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

The Fifty Caliber Shooter's Association has competitions including 1000 yard shooting. 2200 yards is very very long range, and most competitions don't go that far. It can be difficult to find a suitable place for such extreme long range shooting. I was hoping to find legitimate distance records for comparison, and there may be some out there, but I don't know where. .50 BMG is well known for its extreme long range ability. My guess is, while far from easy, such a long shot isn't impossible either. I don't have a good reference to try to guess exactly how hard it would be, though. Competitions generally include way more than one shot, so it may be difficult to guess how hard it would be to hit with a single shot. Friday (talk) 20:10, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I did some further researching and found that the longest confirmed sniper kill was by a Canadian sniper in Afghanistan from a range of over 2,600 yards. So I guess it is possible. Acceptable 20:39, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

If the bullet will actually go that far with enough energy left to kill someone - then it's not so much a matter of whether the shot is possible so much as the probability of making it on the first try. Even a totally useless shot (like me for example) will occasionally hit what they are aiming for by pure chance - even the best marksman will miss occasionally when things conspire against him and he can only take a single shot. So the question for the movie (and let's all remember "It's Only A Movie"!) is would the character be able to base his actions on the assumption that he would hit the target on the first try over that distance. If the chances were only 10% - then probably he'd work harder to get closer - if the chances were 50/50 then maybe he'd make sure that he'd catch the victim in a situation where he could take several shots to ensure a hit - and if the chances were 90% likely, then he might well take that to be "good enough". But it's never a definite thing so if you want to debate the realities of the movie, you might want to ask "What were the motivations of the character to take such a large risk of missing rather than choosing a more promising position?". SteveBaker 01:38, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

the motivation was to frame the one person who had the ability, opportunity and potential motive. Corvus cornix 03:12, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, in the movie no actual person made the shot, but that's another issue... ;-) Boy, that was a dumb movie, in any case... --24.147.86.187 16:16, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

According to this article .50 caliber rifles are accurate up to about 2000 yards and the bullets travels at 4000 feet per second. So yes 2200 yards would be very possible for a trained sniper. I once spoke to an experienced shooter about this subject and his opinion was that for distances like this, you would have to take wind and gravity into consideration. One would have to aim slightly higher than the target, or adjust the scopes on the rifle for the conditions. Sandman30s 20:03, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

With a rifle, at extreme range you elevate the rear site, so the bullet goes up at a steeper angle than for a normal shot, and naturally comes down at a steeper angle when it reaches the target. Thus it has a greater chance of missing a standing person than a bullet in a flatter trajectory. Also, it will strike with lower velocity, and it will be acted on more by wind, and the target has more likelihood of moving between the trigger squeeze and the impact. If it went 2000 even at the initial velocity of 4000 feet/second, the target would have to hold very still to get hit 1.5 seconds later. If the target saw the muzzle flash, he would have time to take a step to the right and make a rude gesture to the shooter before the bulet reached him. Of course the shooter could anticipate that and aim where he anticipates the target will move. The old advice to zig-zag unpredictably makes some sense. 23:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Edison

These types of rifles typically have a flash inhibitor, so the target would not be able to see the flash. It also serves to absorb the impact of the recoil. Remember if the bullet has to take 1.5 seconds to reach the target, it would have fallen at the rate of 10 metres/second, so it would be more than 15 metres of drop given there would be some acceleration towards eventual terminal velocity. Drop an object in front of you and imagine how far it would fall in 1.5 seconds - the bullet would also drop at the same rate. Knowing this, the sniper would aim (or set his scope) more than 15 metres above the target. Other conditions such as crosswinds and humidity would also factor into the scopes. The sniper would have to have help calculating speed and direction of wind, like a golfer's caddy. With all of these complications, it would be astonishing that he hits his target at first attempt, given also that people don't keep "dead" still especially political targets who are told to keep moving and are surrounded by guards. Sandman30s 11:17, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Sniper team

In a US Army/Marine Corp/Navy 2-man sniper team, who is the leader of the team; the sniper or the spotter? Thanks. Acceptable 20:44, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

The spotter is. He/She also provides other info., especially about the weather, such as wind velocity, which will affect the round travelling to its target. 205.240.144.225 07:18, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

But Howstuffworks has an article on sniping [[3]] and it says that the sniper is. I have also read sources that confirm your response. This is confusing. Acceptable 15:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I shoot small bore rifle using a Club rifle. I know that to adjust the sights for my eyesight and style I need to click left twice and once down. That makes the sights move just enough to allow me to aim for the bull and hit it.86.219.35.208 16:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC)JP

Left twice and once down from where? PeteVerdon 20:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

cannibalism

Is there any truth in cannibalism in Pilcher Inn in Poughkeepsie New York?69.21.24.125 20:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

It was a long time ago, so it would be hard to pin the facts down accurately. I found this web page with the general outlines of the story. Make of it what you will. —Steve Summit (talk) 21:09, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

mud rubbed baseballs

How many Baseballs are used by MLB during a season? 76.116.36.108 21:02, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

According to this, about 160 000. - Akamad 00:58, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

And supposedly they all get rubbed with mud from the Mississippi River. Edison 23:25, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's mud from the Delaware River. Wikipedia even has information about it here. — Michael J 03:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Publication

To acquire 110th congressional directory, loose leaf
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.243.237.14 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 30 June 2007

Opium/Morphine/Heroin

I've read all the articles on all three but was unable to find my answer. What are the differences between Opium, Morphine and Heroin? Do they not all use the same Morphine base for their recreational abuse? Which of the three costs more on the street? Thanks. Acceptable 23:54, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Opium is the raw sap that oozes out of immature opium poppy seed pods that have been intentionally bruised. Morphine is a pure chemical compound, one of several psychoactive compounds that are present in opium. Heroin, also known as diacetylmorphine, is a different pure chemical compound; it is not present in opium but is produced by chemical modification of morphine. The main effects of both morphine and heroin on the human brain take place through the same molecule, the mu opioid receptor, so the effects are similar. In fact, our article heroin claims that heroin is rapidly metabolized into morphine in the brain, and that it is the resulting morphine that is responsible for the effects. The effect of opium is also largely similar, since morphine is its dominant psychoactive component. --mglg_(talk) 02:12, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, according to a peer-reviewed report on emedicine.com [4], heroin differs from morphine in many ways:

• Heroin is (gram for gram) three to five times as potent as morphine.
• Heroin gives a more intense euphoria (and greater relief from pain) than morphine, but its half-life is shorter.
• Unlike what our article claims, this article claims that heroin isn't metabolized directly into morphine: it's metabolized by various organs (but primarily by the liver, not the brain) into a chemical called 6-monoacetylmorphine, or 6-MAM, which over a period of time is metabolized by the liver and brain into morphine. The morphine is then metabolized, again primarily by the liver, and excreted both in the bile and in the urine.

• Incidentally, this is why heroin is never taken orally: if you swallow heroin, it passes through the stomach membrane into the Hepatic portal vein system where it's metabolized into 6-MAM on the first pass, so none of the heroin reaches the brain unchanged. 6-MAM doesn't give you as much of a euphoric high as heroin, nor is it as good of a pain reliever. If you inject it, most of the heroin will reach the brain untouched because it won't go through the liver before reaching the brain.

• Heroin is still used in many countries to relieve pain in the terminally ill, especially in cancer patients. --Charlene 06:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Two Mammary intercourse questions

• Why is it called an intercourse being an outercourse?
• What about its parallel "bottom cheek sex"? As yet, this practice is fully ignored in Wikipedia, but why? --Thick Peter 23:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

(deleted anon comment which broke WP:NPA -- Marnanel)

Presumably on the mistaken assumption that it's outside rather than inside, whereas "inter" means between (two people). While BCS may appear to be ignored by Wikipedia, it is not ignored by we Wikipedians. It is just that no one has yet found language that can do full justice to an essentially sensuous experience. Rather than waste time referring to an encyclopedia to discover what strawberries and cream tastes like, go visit the supermarket. You are in for a treat.--Mrs Wibble-Wobble 11:52, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Your statement does not give chapter in what way BCS would be, from that point of view, different to any of the sexual practices currently described here. --Thick Peter 12:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I think perhaps you have an overly-restricted idea of the word "intercourse". The word "intercourse" meaning "sex" was first recorded in 1798, but "sexual intercourse" is a natural development of its primary meaning "dealings or communications between persons or groups" (American Heritage Dictionary), and at a basic level, then, merely means "sexual dealings between persons or groups". Given the dominant phallocentricism of our culture, especially over the last few centuries, it was unsurprising that it would come to be defined more narrowly as an insertive sexual act (oral, anal, or vaginal intercourse), and that we would have to come up with a word for all the other things people are creative enough to come up with when they're horny. The word "outercourse" was a useful coinage, but it only dates back to 1990 (and you should possibly note that even fellatio and cunnilingus are counted as outercourse by the American Heritage Dictionary). So don't think that the phrase "mammary intercourse" (or "axilliary intercourse" or whatever) is necessarily wrong merely because it doesn't map to a system someone made up in 1990. People have been doing it for much longer than that. Marnanel 15:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Thx, I'll add this info in Outercourse. If anyone has an idea what to write about BCS, it won't do bad. --Thick Peter 16:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)