Humanities desk
< November 12	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 14 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities 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.

November 13

Baby boom in Arizona after D-backs championship

D-backs has the most exciting finish to the World Series championship. Trailing 2-1 in the bottom of the ninth inning against the Yankees in Game 7 of the 2001 World Series, the D-backs scored one in that inning to tie it up, and a game-winning RBI in the same inning that immediately ended with World Series champions, exciting the fans. It is said to be the highest excitement among the fans ever when watching them win the World Series. As a result, it must've been baby boom in Arizona in late July and early August 2002, but I didn't find any coverage of it. I believe that this dramatic championship may have temporarily increased the birthrate in the state of Arizona by as much as 10%, leading to the increase of attendance in Arizona high schools in 2016. What do you guys think of those, including an estimated 10% increase in birthrate? Planet Star 04:18, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I googled "arizona population estimates 2000s" and this[1] is one item that came up. If you compare the estimates for each year, you might be able to discern whether there was a significant spike in 2002. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:23, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The change in birthrates in a particular three-week period would not significantly increase the population while not producing a spike in population for just one year alone. I looked it up but I don't see a significant spike in birthrate in 2002; there would only be a minor spike in July and August. If I look at month-by-month birthrate data in 2002, which would be hard to find, I should see a slight increase in July and August than otherwise would be if D-backs didn't win the pennant and championship in 2001. Planet Star 04:50, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I first heard this kind of theory in 1966 when I was 14 years old, nine months after the great blackout in the northeast US and parts of Canada. Supposedly, lots of extra babies were born because couples had lots of extra sex when the lights went out. This ignores the fact that a large percentage of women are not fertile on any given day, and any given act of unprotected intercourse has a low rate of beginning a pregnancy, plus the fact that many couples would have had sex anyway even with the lights on. The rationale is even weaker these days when contraception is ubiquitous, and people know in advance that a World Series game is being played, and may well buy champagne and condoms. Snopes has debunked this line of thinking here. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:27, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In May of 1980, Mt. St. Helens erupted violently, with consequent temporary impact that forced a lot of people to stay indoors. Nine months later there was reported to be a spike in the birth rate of areas affected by the eruption. Johnny Carson commented that it was funny that that one big explosion led to all those little ones! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:21, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When is Mothers' Day?

Nine months after Fathers' Day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.208.70 (talk) 13:33, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get back to the World Series discussion? Baby boom occur in a city where their sports team won a championship. It wasn't just in Arizona in 2002 where baby boom occur because of D-backs winning the World Series nine months earlier. Baby boom occurred in Los Angeles in 2003 because the Anaheim Angels won the World Series, in Florida in 2004 because the Florida Marlins won it, in Boston in 2005 because of Red Sox breaking the 86-year-old curse with their championship, in Chicago in 2006 because of the White Sox winning their first World Series in 88 years, and so on. Chicago witnessed its another summer baby boom in 2017 because of the Cubs winning the World Series for the first time in 108 years. Houston will witness its baby boom in summer of 2018 because of the Astros winning their first championship. The baby boom would be good for Houston because of the devastation from Hurricane Harvey that took away numerous lives. Planet Star 23:20, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Any effect might be drowned out. The Daily Telegraph of 4 November notes:

Rather more scientifically, the highest proportion of babies in Britain are born in September and October, meaning the deep midwinter is the most popular time to conceive.

What national border in Europe is geometric?

What national border in Europe is geometric? Benjamin (talk) 06:33, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably a border between an independent country and a dependency of another country qualifies as a "national border"; then the border between Gibraltar and Spain (dark gray here) appears to qualify. I don't know how it's actually defined, though. Apparently the Treaty of Utrecht just refers to the "Town of Gibraltar" as it already existed in 1713.

If a disconnected segment of the border between two independent countries qualifies as "a border", then also consider the border between Finland and Sweden on the island of Märket. At least, I think it's disconnected; I'm not sure about maritime boundaries within the Baltic Sea.

--69.159.60.147 (talk)

The border between Poland and Kaliningrad Oblast (Russia) comes close, although it's not perfect. --Wrongfilter (talk) 08:11, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Large sections of the northern borders between Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia have long, straight sections (in areas with little or no settlement). They are defined in terms of certain fixed points, joined by straight lines. However, given the peculiar wording of the question, I am wondering if the answer being sought may be France: the continental land area of France is often called "The Hexagon" Wymspen (talk) 09:20, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Except the blue link they included in their description states "Geometric boundaries are formed by straight lines (such as lines of latitude or longitude), or occasionally arcs (Pennsylvania/Delaware) regardless of the physical and cultural features of the area." --Jayron 32 11:39, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it matters whether the straight sections are long or short - for example part of the frontier might run down the middle of a straight road or along a property boundary - most plots have straight fences. 82.13.208.70 (talk) 12:36, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not directly relevant to the question, but I have marked the definition in Border linked to above as ^{[citation needed]}; in fact I think it might be ^{[original research?]}. I can find no evidence that the phrase exists outside that article. See Talk:Border/Archives/2017#Geometric borders. --ColinFine (talk) 18:15, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Baarle-Nassau 1.54.111.248 (talk) 14:34, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]