Miscellaneous desk
< January 27	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 29 >

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.

January 28

How did they take these pictures?

These airplane belly pictures are almost plan view. You can even see the ground-touching areas of the tires.

You can dig a deep and large hole in the ground and hang the Boeing 747 on a very tall tree to take these pictures.

You can put the Boeing 747 upside down, and take the picture from a helicopter.

Well, I don't think these methods are practical.

Did the photographer take several hundred pictures and stitch them together in a computer? -- Toytoy (talk) 03:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or you could just lay on your back at the end of a runway and take pics of the underside of planes as they land. And seeing that some of these images show landing gear and flaps extended, i'd imagine that's just what he did. Foxhill (talk) 03:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uncontrollable light condition, engine exhaust, control surface movements, landing gear angle, ... . There can be all kinds of problems. If I were the photographer, I may setup multiple cameras at different places and take as many shots as possible. All these factors may still ruin my pictures. I am skeptical to this theory. -- Toytoy (talk) 04:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No doubt there is a great deal of skill and luck involved, otherwise his work wouldn't be so widely renowned. Some extracts from news coverage - "Jeffrey Milstein, a New York based photographer, has a recent series entitled Aircraft, large-scale photographs that are not of model airplanes but rather of incoming planes outside of LAX [...] Outside the fenced field, he waits for approaching airplanes and snaps crystal clear shots of the incoming beasts."[1] and [2] says the only alteration he made was to replace the sky with a uniform white background. Something he himself admits to - "I take the pictures near the end of the runway, mostly at LAX. I use a 39mpxl digital back on a Contax 645. I use Photoshop to remove the backgrounds, and I print limited edition pigment inkjet prints in 20″x20″ and 40″x40″ size, which sell in my galleries in NY and LA."[3] Foxhill (talk) 05:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My first thought was that they were models, but then I read what Foxhill wrote... takes a lot of patience I believe. --Ouro (blah blah) 07:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found other photos. [4] [5] [6] [7] Enjoy! Oda Mari (talk) 18:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not too hard -- I've taken a few like that myself. You find the landing flight path for an airport, look for a field three to five miles away, and position yourself under the flight path. When an airplane goes by overhead, point your camera straight up and take the picture. With a busy airport, you can spend an afternoon and wind up with a hundred or so candidate shots. --Carnildo (talk) 01:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Falling from the sky

Dear Wiki contributors,

I recall being told that Galileo conducted an experiment where he showed that two balls of different masses fell at the same speed towards the ground. I know this may sound naive but, with that logic, does that mean a 300 lb man can use the same parachute rated for a 180-lb man? If so, then you should also be able to drop a tank from the sky with the same parachute?

Also, I recall reading that terminal velocity for a human body falling is somewhere less than 200 mph. Why then, did Joseph Kittinger reach speeds of 600 mph when he was doing his landmark world-record skydive?99.240.177.206 (talk) 03:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. Speed is not the same as momentum which is speed and weight. If the parachute is going to change your speed it has to be able to change your momentum.

Joseph Kittinger was skydiving from an astonishing 19.5 miles up. I imagine the air is a lot thinner up there, resulting in a higher terminal velocity. APL (talk) 03:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The air is a lot thinner -- Kittinger needed to wear a pressure suit. See Project Excelsior for more. Also Armstrong Limit -- above about 12 miles the pressure is so low water boils at body temperature. Pfly (talk) 04:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure User:APL's explanation makes much sense. What Galileo demonstrated was not that all objects fall at the same speed, but that the acceleration due to gravity is the same for all objects. However, the accelerating force of gravity (which we call "weight") is opposed by the decelerating force of pushing through the air (which we call "drag"), and drag increases with speed. When the forces of drag and weight are matched, that is the terminal velocity, and is the speed at which the object will tend to fall.

Parachutes work by dramatically increasing the drag of an object. When a parachutist opens their parachute, their drag increases so it's much greater than their weight. They then slow down until the drag from the 'chute matches their weight. The greater the weight of the parachutist, the less they'll slow down before reaching their new terminal velocity, because the parachute has to generate more drag (which requires travelling faster) to match the heavier weight.

I hope that makes sense. If it doesn't, I'll have a go at drawing a diagram later. FiggyBee (talk) 09:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC) (edit; here is my dodgy diagram). FiggyBee (talk) 13:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds plausible. So, in practice, are there different-sized parachutes according to the weight of the jumper, or a single size that is adequate for (almost) anyone? AndrewWTaylor (talk) 14:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, different sized parachutes are available. Also, most skydiving parachutes are actually parafoils - as well as vertical drag, they're designed to fly forward through the air and generate lift like an aircraft wing. FiggyBee (talk) 15:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The media isn't doing a very good job of explaining the SocGen debacle

"In fact, Kerviel's first portfolio of financial instruments -- in his case futures -- included genuine operations -- but the offsetting portfolio proved to be "fictitious," the bank said." That's the typical explanation. But I still don't understand how 50 billion euros in positions can be concealed. Are there tens of trillions of euros worth of trades moving through the bank everyday? Help me understand.

66.91.224.203 (talk) 04:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The bank indicates all controls were violated. As far as I understand, he bought positions and then created "faked" sales document to cover himself. That way, although there were a couple of operations, the balance of the bank was unaffected. Electronically, the bank still had the same amount of money, but in reality, that money was transformed into stock positions. According to the bank article here, French presidential aide Raymond Soubie stated that Kerviel dealt with $73.3 billion (more than the bank's market capitalization of $52.6 billion). Remember that he has been doing that, apparently, for over a year, and that the only way the bank noticed was when he forgot to "sell" what he had bought. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 05:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Completed eBay auctions

Is there a way to see results of previous eBay auctions? I know there is a completed listing search on ebay.com, but it only goes back 15 days. Is there a website that will go back further (a free website, preferably)? --71.194.241.127 (talk) 05:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know of this one, but it's only for past auctions of vinyl records. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 06:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Internet Archive might work for this if you have a specific URL in mind. Recury (talk) 17:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

His Dark Materials and Claims of Evidence for Christianity as the One True Religion

Please reply to this edit only if you are not a Christian. Please reply to this edit especially if you are a reader or fan of the series His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman. By reader I mean both by someone who is reading it or someone who has read it before.

I’ve heard Christians claim that there are “proofs” and “evidences” for Christianity to be the “one true religion”. Those proofs and evidences include evidences against evolution, evidences that God exists, evidences that what the Bible says is true, and evidences that Jesus Christ is God and the son of God. See the articles Proofs Of Christ And The Bible, Fulfilled Prophecy As Proof Of The Bible, Science as Proof Of The Bible, Proofs Of The Existence Of God, Reasons For the Bible, Heaven, Deity, Resurrection, Creation, Baptism,, Evolution: Evidence For Creation In 6 Days, and Ten Proofs That Jesus Christ is the Messiah.

What would readers and fans of the series His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman think about all those evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? Would they think they are really evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? Would they think they really mean, tell, show, and prove that Christianity is the one true religion? If not, then why?

What would Philip Pullman, the author of His Dark Materials, as the author of His Dark Materials, think about all those evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? What would all the different characters of His Dark Materials, especially those on Lyra’s side, think about them? What would the angels Xaphania and Balthamos think about them? What would Lord Asriel, Mary Malone, and King Ogunwe think about them? Would all the actors and actresses who played all the different characters in the movie The Golden Compass, such as Daniel Craig, think about them? Would they think they are really evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? Would they think they really mean, tell, show, and prove that Christianity is the one true religion? If not, then why? By actors and actresses, I only mean those who are not Christians and especially mean those who play characters on Lyra’s side.

Have Philip Pullman and those actors and actresses heard about those evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion before? Has Philip Pullman heard about those evidences when or before he was writing His Dark Materials? If so, then what do they think about them? Are they convinced? Do they agree with those evidences?

If you are a reader or fan of His Dark Materials, then what do you, a reader or fan of His Dark Materials, as a reader or fan of His Dark Materials, think about all those evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? Have you heard about those evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion before? Do you think they are really evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? Do you think they really mean, tell, show, and prove that Christianity is the one true religion? If not, then why?

Bowei Huang (talk) 06:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reference desk is not a soapbox; The question itself is by no means wrong, but I think you would see better, and more (relevant) answers coming from several christian webforums, especially if you seek the answers of christian people rather than those of anyone else. 213.161.190.228 (talk) 06:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original poster is not asking for Christians to respond; he is asking for non-Christians to respond. However, the links the original poster has provided are all broken links. This was pointed out a couple of days ago when an anonymous person posted the same links at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Evidence for Christianity as the One True Religion?, and the links are still broken. If Philip Pullman or the movie cast clicked on those links, they would be firmly convinced that "Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage". In any event, the Wikipedia Reference Desk is not intended for religious debate along these lines. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are many many reasons why a “one true religion” almost certainly does not exist. If you are genuinely interested you can read about these paradoxes: Omnipotence paradox, Problem of evil, Problem of Hell, Argument from nonbelief, Argument from inconsistent revelations, Argument from poor design, TANG, Theological noncognitivism, Argument from free will, Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit, Occam's Razor, Atheist's Wager. If you just want to start a debate, why don’t you take it over to a chat room like Dawkins.net and I and others will be glad to argue the point with you there. --S.dedalus (talk) 07:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the links provided all seem to work for me. DuncanHill (talk) 10:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(In-dent, in-between-post, hope it is OK) This is 213.161 - I very much misread what was written. My apologies for that. As for the request for specific people to (not!) respond, it makes even less sense to me now. At first and second glance it looked like a dare to Christians, and I failed to assume good intent. :) I'll leave this to other Wikipeds now. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 22:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have asked no fewer than 21 questions-which ones are we supposed to be answering? You also ask what the actors and actresses would think and then later specify this is only the actors and actresses who are non-Christians-AFAIK I don't recall any of the cast being particularly strongly in support or against Christianity... Also why limit non-Christians to answer?I'm sure for questions asking about the cast's views and Pullman's views himself,then anyone is just as capable of answering.I'm sure there must be a His Dark Materials forum somewhere where you can discuss this-I wouldn't be surprised if there's already a discussion going... Lemon martini (talk) 11:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A question with the same link spam and the same disclaimer appeared in the humanities desk. APL (talk) 14:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct that this had already been mentioned. I hadn't noticed. I withdraw my comment. However, please do not edit the content of my posts. Thank you. APL (talk) 01:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You said I have been asking too many questions together. But what if now I'm not going to ask you all these questions, I'm just going to ask you two? They are that what would readers, fans, and the author of His Dark Materials think about those evidences, would they agree that those evidences really mean that Christianity is true, and if they wouldn't agree, then why.

But what about now when I'm not asking people what they themselves think, personally think, about all those evidences, I'm asking about what a special particular specific group and kind of people have something specifically in common either think or would think, probably think, about a particular thing, topic, and subject? I'm not asking you now what your personal opinion is now, I'm just asking what is the opinion other people have or would have about something else. By what those other people think, I mean mostly and mainly by what they mostly, mainly, usually, generally, and commonly think, would think, probably think, or would probably think about them.

Those links are part of the the Answers Book, a website by an Independent Baptist pastor called Keith Piper.

Are there any websites about His Dark Materials where I could debate and discuss about His Dark Materials and about it with others? Bowei Huang (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A little more help needed

Having previously inculcated Wikipedia with my requests for information regarding callgirls, I feel I must impose on your kind and generous help once more. After careful consideration of the responses to my previous question, I have decided to arrange a meeting with a local callgirl. Please could any of you whom are familiar with callgirls in the Glostershire, England area please provide me with contact information. Once again I am in your debt in this matter, and I look forward to a speedy and detailed reply. Many thanks, Weasly (talk) 11:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The backs of local newspapers have a wide range of personal services advertised.Although why you'd need a callgirl in Gloucestershire when you live in Berlin is somewhat of a mystery-it's hardly local... Lemon martini (talk) 11:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you lemon for reminding me to update my userpage. I just came back from Germany yesterday. Thought I would have better luck over there, what with the reputation of German women. But it seems they are as equally unimpressed with me as British gals. Weasly (talk) 12:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any relation to Wesley Wyndam-Pryce, by the way? —Tamfang (talk) 01:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can just share my only sexual experience. She was not a prostitute, but it felt very awkward and I was not horny at all. I felt disgusted for days afterwards. She actually came to my place, for free. She was older than me, though. I suppose a young hottie will be better for you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 12:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain how one can procure a callgirl for free. Weasly (talk) 12:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She wasn't a callgirl. I met her on a dating site. The one time that worked. Nobody has replied to me since, and I have now given up on ever finding a girlfriend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 15:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard that joining the Society for Creative Anachronism can help. —Tamfang (talk) 02:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend caution in your intended activities, Weasly. According to Prostitution, prostitution is illegal in England and Wales. This would make finding an appropriate person more difficult. We would hate to be seen as encouraging illegal activities. Good luck to you in terms of your search for fulfillment, however. (the Australian SCA has the same reputation, to a degree, BTW) Steewi (talk) 02:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alien robots and DuckTales

When I was a kid, I saw an episode of "DuckTales" which I recorded. It was the one where they actually go into (far distant) outer space to some sort of "robot planet" where they melt metals (and Scrooge's coins).

In one scene, Fenton faces the "main frame", which is a huge, stationary computer and the robots' leader, with mechanical arms on the sides. When it realizes that Fenton is actually a human/duck/non-robot, he gets curious and starts undressing him against his will. I was scared but very fascinated by this as a kid, and now I think it may have been my first sexual fetish, despite my very young age. What do you think, and is this fantasy/fetish called something? (Being in control by alien robots.)

Also, while I'm mentioning DuckTales: Is it normal for kids, like me, to think that they thought out, produced, drew and finalized every episode of such animated TV series every week, just in time for it to air on TV? I seriously thought that. :$ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 11:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No clue on the fetish question, but on the latter question, yes, it's common for kids to be totally baffled as to how slick products are produced and to come up with their own explanations. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 13:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had a quick, non-expert look down the list of paraphilias, which mentions robot fetishism and xenophily (in the sense of attraction to alien beings); perhaps surprisingly, there is no mention of an undressing-related fetish. Hassocks5489 (talk) 20:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was a time when I understood about actors but not about stuntmen or blanks, so I wondered how all those actors killed on Superman got paid. —Tamfang (talk) 01:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Is this cartoon going on the air live?" "No, Homer. Very few cartoons are broadcast live, it's a terrible strain on the animators' wrists." Adam Bishop (talk) 04:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At least one animated show - South Park - is thought out, produced, drawn, and finalized every week. -Elmer Clark (talk) 23:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jump from platform that is falling from the sky

If you attach your feet to a big metallic platform which is dropped from high up in the sky with an air plane, and then you jump from it, straight up, a few meters before it crashes into the ground, will you survive? If not, why not? Makes sense to me. Or am I missing something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 12:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're dramatically overestimating the power of human legs. Your jump would only slow you down by 1m/s or less (and some of that would be absorbed by pushing away the metal, of course), so if you were falling at 50 m/s you'd still hit the ground at 49 m/s. FiggyBee (talk) 12:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(after edit conflict) In short, no. It was tested (although with a slightly different setting) in Mythbusters, see MythBusters (season 2)#Elevator of Death. You will be falling at terminal velocity (roughly 195 km/h) and the speed you generate upwards from the platform won't be anywhere near that. - Dammit (talk) 12:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time to attempt to calculate it now, but intuitively I would expect the terminal velocity of a "big metallic platform" to be significantly greater than that of a human falling free. If so, your impact would be even worse than if you just jumped out of the plane by yourself. --Anonymous, 17:01 UTC, January 28, 2008.

Your legs can produce enough energy to jump about two or three feet in the air if you really work at it. Discounting air resistance, that should be enough energy to counteract a fall of two or three feet. The difference between falling 100ft and the equivalent of 98ft wouldn't really help you. APL (talk) 14:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This analysis is invalid. Work is equal to force times distance, where "distance" is what your center of mass travels during the time it has force applied on it. This is different when you are falling than when you are on the ground. The correct simple solution is in terms of velocities. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 17:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It works if you're Bugs Bunny. —Tamfang (talk) 01:41, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In "theory" if there was a giant spring attached to the metal platform, and you were standin on top of it, and it was triggered just before the platform hit the ground, and it was strong enough to reduce your speed to zero (increasing the speed of the platform as it hit the ground), then "in theory" you could have a gentle landing. The problem with this theory is that, as Meni says above, work = force times distance, and you don't have much distance to play with, so the spring would have to be so strong that it would crush your legs and cause fatal internal injuries almost as serious as hitting the ground with the platform. The way to survive landing from a great height is to land on something soft which gradually slows you down without any very large forces. One example is a tall leafy tree with flexible branches, and there have been recorded cases of people surviving falls of great distances by landing in a tree. Please don't try this, because trees can not be relied upon to behave in the ideal manner to slow you down gradually. Hitting a solid branch at speed will break your spine or crush your skull. dbfirs 19:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

National debts

OK. Maybe I am hallucinating here, but what the hell am I reading? USA and Sweden (and probably many other countries) have INSANE amounts of money "borrowed" (from where?). I don't get this at all. How can there be any other priority than trying to pay these money back? USA apparently has TRILLIONS in debt. This, in my world of raw logic, means that both USA and Sweden should be a third-world countries if they'd just pay the money they owe others.

1. Why did they borrow these amounts? 2. Who lends money to a country? And why? 3. Why am I the only one who is confused about this? If I'm a billionaire who owes several billions to somebody, I am not a billion but somebody who should be living at "minimal existence" terms.

This is madness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 12:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read Government debt? This seems to answer some of your questions (for example the money tends to be borrowed in the form of things like Government bonds and Sovereign bonds). 130.88.151.203 (talk) 12:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also List of countries by public debt may be of interest. It appears that Sweden isn't actually that high up in the list. 130.88.151.203 (talk) 12:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Loans are a pretty normal part of 99% of individual's financial lives - be it for cars, for houses or for other things. What reason would it be 'odd' for governments to have them? Additionally when you take out a loan to purchase a home you don't focus purely on paying that back as you have other obligations, other wants and needs from life. Similarly government has other priorities and other things to deal with. Loans can provide quick access to funding that may not be possible without changing taxation/stimulating the economy - such loans if well used can actually make the economy grow more quickly and end up having a positive effect on the lives of that country's citizens. Debt gets a bad name (particularly in the current climate) but well managed debt serves a purpose in almost all walks of life - from individuals to businesses with billions of dollars in turn-over, to governments that work on budgets running to the trillions. The basic reasoning is broadly the same, the amount and what it is spent on, dramatically different. ny156uk (talk) 23:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also 'national debt' is not a 'bad' thing, as if the government is in credit that means the people owe the government. All credit must have a debt back at it. If a country is in debt its because people have been used by the government to do work. Also most counteries debts are way over rated. For example the US debt isn't that bad. A change of government can change things alot. For example Clinton had the US debt $400b profit per year, bush has it 500b loss per year. Getting out of trillions of dollars debt isn't impossible and can happen quickly.--155.144.251.120 (talk) 02:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at Fractional-reserve banking for an introduction to how money is 'created'. --Joe^Talk_Work 18:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noise Pollution

My neighbours upstairs are very noisy. I can hear their every footstep on their laminate floor coming through my ceiling. I live in a ground floor flat. They are above me. What can I do? I live in London. Is there any legal action I can take? Weasly (talk) 12:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Berlin, Gloucestershire and now London; you certainly do get around. Try talking to you neighbour first (if your on a friendly basis, that is) and they'll probably be happy to keep their noise down, if they can. If not then you may be able to take some form of legal action. Acording to this "You can also take legal action yourself through the magistrates court under Section 82 of the Environmental Protection Act. You do not need a solicitor and it need not cost much. You will need to prove to the magistrate beyond reasonable doubt that the problem you are complaining of amounts to a nuisance." Also have a look at these 1 2 3. Think outside the box 13:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this legal advice? Do we give legal advice now? --Ouro (blah blah) 13:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, quoting from a BBC article and giving links about noise issues in the UK counts as "legal advice". --24.147.69.31 (talk) 14:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If all you're hearing is them walking about, there is no legal action you can take against them. I guess you'll either have to move flat, get some earplugs, or help them with the cost of a carpet.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might talk to your landlord about it, though I doubt they'll care. I am sure there are ways to make the building more soundproof but they are likely expensive. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 14:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't say, so I'm wondering if you've actually talked to the "perpetrators" about this. Chances are they'll be reasonable about it, put themselves in your shoes (metaphorically speaking), and do what they can (which may not be much, admittedly) to minimise the noise. I'd be surprised if any legal proceedings could get off the ground if this step hadn't first been taken. And you never know, you might make some new friends. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Soft furnishings 'soften' noises so you could try adding a rug to your room/more soft-furnishings. I know it is coming from the ceiling but it should deaden it a little. Also as the above state speaking with the people is the only fair way to (at the least) start trying to resolve the issue, if things persist then you may want to try take it further. You could fit sound-proofing in your rooms but this may be expensive. This problem, however, is the curse of living in apartments/flats that have people on floors above you. It is one of the reasons that ground-floor living is usually slightly cheaper than the higher-floors (that and street-level noise). Good luck ny156uk (talk) 23:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's the deal with this site?

The online computer store cpumart.com seems at first glance to have invested a lot in its user friendliness. However, at the bottom of the page there are four links on the "Help & Support" category which are all broken or empty (note that the "discussions forum" provides no facilities for posting messages) and have been for several weeks. When I emailed them with questions about this and other things, I never got any response. Does anyone have a clue how can such a site afford to be so sloppy? -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 17:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They;re alomst certainly using a generic template for a selling site - and just need to add their logo/product details/colour scheme. The contact details will be there by default - and they forgot/didn't notice/care to change them. All in all that means one less person to employ/hire and no doubt the saving are passed on to you the customer... Why they didn't respond to your e-mail - don't know - maybe it went in the junk if you weren't already a customer - perhaps they only respond to essential mail ? Did you check they were still in business?87.102.67.145 (talk) 13:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no reason to believe they are no longer in business (though if their average customer is anything like me, they pretty soon will be!), but don't know how to check for sure. I find it unacceptable that any business would aribtrarily screen legitimate customer requests for support. Oh well. Thanks for shedding some light on this. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 18:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In my experience support questions can take a long time to get a reply (weeks).. 87.102.77.153 (talk) 17:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Google logo

What day is today? I don't see an explaination on their logo page.

http://www.google.com/holidaylogos.html

I know Google's founders loved Lego, but is today a Lego holiday? -- Toytoy (talk) 17:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you mouse over the logo at http://www.google.com/intl/en/ it says "50th anniversary of the Lego brick". —An gr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 17:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. From Lego: "The modern Lego brick was patented on January 28, 1958". -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 17:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I read in The Guardian last Saturday that there are 62 pieces of Lego for every person in the world. Presumably this refers to the amount actually produced. Good to see that we have managed our resources so well. And BTW whose got my 62? Richard Avery (talk) 18:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't realize they were yours. I will send them right away, as soon as you provide your address and personal identification details such as social security number and credit card number & security code. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 19:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I got waaaaaaaay more than 62. I wonder whose else's I have? —Steve Summit (talk) 19:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mine--Johnluckie (talk) 21:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can account for a couple as well. :) bibliomaniac 1 5 05:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there no pay version of Windows Live Messenger?

Why can't you opt out from the ads in Windows Live Messenger? I hate those f***ing ads. Customers should have the ability to pay to get rid of them. Especially since it's a Microsoft product... Please think before replying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 17:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I refuse to think before replying. You could use the patch from mess.be, although using it to remove the ads does violate Microsoft's EULA. FiggyBee (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I mean by thinking before replying. I'm not gonna run some random EXE by som guy who runs a pro-Islam Web site. Besides, this is besides the point as I just wanted an official solution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 18:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-Islam site? Doesn't look much like one to me. 83.147.139.108 (talk) 13:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, as you obviously already know there's no official solution, is this another non-question question? FiggyBee (talk) 18:53, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think people are a bit edgy today on the non-question issue. I think it is perfectly legitimate to request general insight about how the world works (my own latest question falls into this category). Suggestions about possible reasons for Microsoft's decision would be appropriate here. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 19:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If this were a free-form discussion forum, then I'd agree without reservation. But it's not, and I don't. --LarryMac | Talk 19:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could hire a programmer to do the same thing the "guy who runs a pro-Islam web site" did. Disabling functionality is generally straightforward, so it might cost as little as $100, which presumably is in the ballpark of what a "Windows Messenger -- Ultimate Messaging Experience Edition" would cost. --Sean 19:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Can i ask a side question? Has anyone ever been proseceuted for breaking the EULA by modifying MSN Messenger?)RobertsZ (talk) 21:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they even have a way to find out if someone's using the patched version. And if they do sue someone, it's gonna be the distributor of the patch, not some random users. I am not a lawyer, but I think you're safe. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 21:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's always free, open-source alternatives like Pidgin (software) or aMSN, just to name a few. --antilived^{T | C | G} 23:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Washing my Face

Hi, sorry this is a pretty trivial question but i can't think where else to ask it without getting useless answers. Basically i have a few spots on my face which dont seem to go, so i want to know if i am washing properly. I usually wash my face when in the shower with a facewash in the morning by getting my face soaked rubbing in the facewash and then thoroughly rinsing it. I dont think there is a problem there, however when i wash at night i wash in a basin n my method may be questionable. I fill the basic full of warm water n 'dunk' my head in so my face is wet and then apply the facewash and once its rubbed in i rinse in the same water then add some more water to rinse my face a little better. I usually wash like this everyday. Is washing this often good? Is the way i wash in the basin helping? Is washing my face in the shower helping? Thanks for any comments

212.140.139.225 (talk) 22:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I heard that first washing with warm water, then doing what you usally do, then ending with cold water is useful. The effect of the warm water is to open up the pores, which can be more thorougly cleaned by your usual method and then rinsing with cold water at the end closes the pores to stop dirt getting in. Although i did hear this from a friend (not a particuarly reliable source) it sounds sensible to me. Also some acne during puberty is perfectly natural, but as always if concerned go see a doctor. RobertsZ (talk) 22:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would think at night, rinsing with fresh, unused water would be best. If it is acne that you are concerned about, a more effective approach would be to buy some anti-acne cream from a pharmacy. If that doesn't work, see a doctor and he/she will be able to prescibe to you a more powerful anti-acne cream. Acceptable (talk) 00:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to hear you are troubled by this problem. I don't think the way you wash your face will affect the acne to a great degree. It is a good idea to wash your face gently with a good unscented soap and then use a skin cleanser or pharmaceutical anti-acne preparation. The way you dunk your face is relatively unimportant, washing your face in the shower is fine. None of what your doing is likely to make your acne worse. If it is really important to you to have a clear skin then go and see your doctor. Richard Avery (talk) 08:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Geta

I realize that this may require some OR but what I'm wondering is if Geta are actually comfortable to wear. They don't seem very comfortable to me. Dismas|^(talk) 22:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no original research to offer, as I have never worn them, but Walking in Geta offers some thoughts, a clip, and "Although neither difficult to walk in, nor uncomfortable, they're definitely not your Reeboks!" ---Sluzzelin talk 02:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've only worn them once, and for a short time. They weren't uncomfortable, as such, but were an entirely different footwear experience compared to the western-style shoes we're used to. I imagine that one would accustom oneself to the feeling relatively quickly. Steewi (talk) 02:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... Thanks! The above mentioned link was interesting, especially so with this statement: Eventually our seemingly infinitely adaptable bodies learn this new (totally unnecessary) skill. Totally unnecessary! :-) Dismas|^(talk) 03:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pocket Watch Care

I've just acquired a pocket watch from 1903 that runs beautifully, and since I've never owned anything with clockwork before I have the following questions:

1. How often would I have to take my watch to be oiled and such so that it always runs in perfect condition?

2. How do I know when I've wound the watch up all the way?

3. Can I adjust the position of the hands while the watch is wound and running?

4. If the answer to question 3 is "No", is it possible to "unwind" the watch or will that damage it?

Thanks in advance! Chris16447 (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just from what I've read; 1, every couple of years. 2, you'll feel a distinct increase in resistance. 3, yes. On most watches, you pull the crown (the winding knob) out and turn it to adjust the hands, then push the crown back in. On others, there's a lever somewhere which switches the crown from winding to adjusting. FiggyBee (talk) 23:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If this watch is high-quality or otherwise especially valuable, you will (a) certainly want to take it to a reputable jeweler for assessment and maintenance, who will also (b) be able to answer the rest of your questions!

—Steve "trying not to make jokes about 'the RD cannot offer horological advice'" Summit (talk) 01:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly useful to know: if you're ever taken prisoner and held as a POW, you can safely store an antique watch intra-rectally. --Sean 23:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's very useful advice. I'll be careful to leave anything priceless at home if I go to war. Better than having to hide, say, a vase, however.Chris16447 (talk) 02:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With 2., just dont wind the watch "all the way" and break it.Polypipe Wrangler (talk) 17:55, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

seeking info in lorraine and aaron cohen, sentenced to jail in penang for drug trafficking

hi there,

i have just read a fantastic book called 'arrested development', which is the story of lorraine and aaron cohen, who ended up on death row in a penang (malaysia) jail for heroin trafficking. i am curious as to how they are travelling today and whether they have finally beaten their addiction(s).

I tried a google search but the only link that was of any help was some new zealand true crime book site, which was waaay out of date anyway.

any help or links would be appreciated. lorraine or aaron (or friends/family) if you happen to be reading this (long shot I know!) I would love to chat and swap stories. I was deeply moved by your account. I have taken the wrong path myself on my life journey and am thankful that it never led to imprisonment, but I know from where you speak.

many thanksDavelicious (talk) 23:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Usually contacting the publisher is the first step unless they have a website and list a contact number or agent there. Cheers Julia Rossi (talk) 03:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]