Miscellaneous desk
< July 28	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 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.

July 29

Curious question about jokes

I was wondering about the origin of these Cantonese jokes:

There are three brothers. Each of them can say only one phrase; they are 'us three brothers' (yeah, direct translation), 'a raisin', and 'hurry up'. They went to the restaurant. The waiter asked, 'who's eating?' 'Us three brothers.' 'What would you like to eat?' 'A raisin.' 'Hurry up!' They were kicked out. Outside, the police asked, 'who killed that person?' 'Us, three brothers.' 'What did you use to kill him?' 'A raisin.' 'Do you need to be sent to Castle Peak Hospital?' 'Hurry up!'
A kid went to school. The teacher asked, 'what is 1+1?' He doesn't know, so the teacher says, 'OK, I'll give you a night. Tell me tomorrow.' The next part has tons of variations. The boy went home and asked his family members. The little brother said, 'Superman', in one variation. Then there was, like, someone watching TV who said something to do with it. But anyway, the next morning the teacher asked him again, and he tried all the answers his family gave him. He saw the principal.
This isn't a joke, just a popular and humorous (and blasphemous) saying. I'm especially curious about the origin of this one: I don't know, 食鬆糕, 食完鬆糕見耶穌, 耶穌教我睇聖經, 我教耶穌睇馬經. I've heard of an extended version but don't remember exactly what it is.

So, where are the origins? Kayau Voting IS evil 03:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does "origins" mean "why are they funny"? Could be some sort of meta-humor type jokes? Along the lines of

Q: Why is a mouse when it's spinning? A: The further, the higher.

or

Q: What's the difference between a duck? A: One of its legs is both the same.

--Trovatore (talk) 04:03, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By origin I mean who was the first to say it or when was it first recorded. I'm mainly curious about the ages of these jokes (which, I daresay, are not low, given the number of variations, especially the second. Kayau Voting IS evil 04:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they mean something in Cantonese. A translated joke usually makes no sense anyway. (The first one seems to make sense though. I've heard jokes like that in English too.) Adam Bishop (talk) 06:03, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They do mean something and I know what they mean, but what I'm curious about is where they came from. Kayau Voting IS evil 06:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At least for 1 and 2 (I can't read 3) I'm sure nobody knows, except the anonymous schoolkid who made them up. They are surely not amusing or clever enough to have been invented by any well-known comedian.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:51, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 3rd joke translated goes "Food cake, food end cake see Jesus, Jesus taught me watching the Bible, I will teach Jesus watching Ma." Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google can be complete and utter bosh! What it means is (IDK is part of the expression): I don't know, I'll eat cakes, after eating cakes I go see Jesus, Jesus teaches me how to read the Bible, I teach Jesus how to read the Form. Kayau Voting IS evil 04:46, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jokes are usually popular oral entertainment, so unless someone has written them down at an earlier age, there is really no way to know the age of them. Even hints, such as the existence of a known location as the hospital mentioned, is not a sure antedatum, as it can be a variation of an earlier joke with a slightly different content. --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:32, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think jokes are rather famous for not having a definitive origin. Our article doesn't mention it, but I've heard it said several times how mysterious it is that nobody ever makes up jokes, they just pass them along (Example). Personally, I think it's an example of evolution by mutation. In some instances, it's a kind of chinese whisper, where the teller doesn't even know he's altering the joke to make it funnier. In other cases, he's all too aware that he's borrowing a premise or turn of phrase and therefore feels that he's not "inventing" the new joke. You've listed these three examples, but honestly, out of all the jokes you know, how many of them do you know the ultimate origin? None. Comedians readily take honest credit for skits they write and stand-up comics take credit for monologues they create, but simple stand-alone jokes seem to remain anonymous. Matt Deres (talk) 11:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's all aliens, I tells ya. Or at least Asimov does: Jokester. Rmhermen (talk) 16:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I "made up" one (Did you hear about the little piggie who only wanted to play video games? He cried Wii, Wii, Wii all the way home) last year, and drew a laugh from some young schoolkids. But, another problem with origins of jokes is why I don't brag about it much. I can't imagine that someone else with kids or who works with them didn't think This Little Piggy and connect the sound "Wee, wee, wee" with the Wii video game system. I dare say that the odds of at least 2 people coming up with that independently would be too high to count. So, I don't think you can properly credit one person with developing a joke. It's just the one who is more able to get it out to the public.Somebody or his brother (talk) 22:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I take issue with Renovator: The version I heard about 40 yrs ago was:

Whats the difference between a duck? One of its legs is the same!

This can be understood by assuming the duck to be half a duck reflected in a mirror. So what is the diff between the real half :::and the reflected half? Not a lot. In fact no difference! So one of its legs is the same as the other (reflected) one. Surreal :::of course, but funny (to me)--Daisychainer (talk) 01:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(OR) I suspect that jokes are connected by strings extending into an unknown dimension. This is because I normally don't have a joke to tell, until I hear a joke. That triggers what I believe is an original joke to rise in my mind. An example: One of my guests from abroad said Thank you for your kind hostility! (mispronouncing "hospitality") which gave everyone a chuckle. At that moment I produced this original (I claim) joke: When a cannibal dies his friends offer condiments to the widow. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 02:09, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's amusing unto itself, but it's kind of a non sequitur; your joke didn't actually play on the previous one, it's just sitting there on its own. If your joke had played off of you being violent or unkind or something, it would have worked much better. "Well, you do sometimes have to be cruel to be kind..." or something. Matt Deres (talk) 13:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Humor does not travel well through time or through translation. A relative told me that it was hysterically funny when comedian Joe Penner would say "Wanna buy a duck?" in the 1930's. In the 1951 science fiction story "The Marching Morons" the protagonist goes to the distant future, where the TV audience laughs when utterly unfunny catch phrases are spoken (Memory fails: Perhaps "Would you buy that for a quarter?"). Johnny Carson got laughs in the 1970's by saying "Boy, it was hot today," followed by the audience shouting in unison "HOW HOT WAS IT?" and some lame joke by Carson about a dog chasing a cat and they were both walking. The same line may be funny if a TV comic or a popular person in a social circle says it, but not if a random person says it. "A funny guy said it, so it must be funny!" (I'd better laugh at the unfunny utterance or people will think I don't have a sense of humor.) Edison (talk) 05:24, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's a bit more to it than whether the joke's words are intrinsically funny. That Carson gag worked because it was an audience participation thing, for example. Further, sometimes the humour comes from knowing and anticipating something will happen and then simply being amused/pleased when it comes around, so it's not the joke you're amused at, it's the fact the joke was told. I suspect that the Penner line about buying a duck probably relied on some kind of visual gag or amusing articulation, so stating the line in print probably wouldn't have worked any better in the 1930s than it does now. Along those same lines, the joke I've gotten the biggest laughs with also relies completely on saying the punch line exactly correctly (so I won't print it here, but you can hear Martin Mull do it on The Aristocrats). Matt Deres (talk) 13:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it was the audience participation. And keep in mind that not all of Carson's joke writers succeeded. Many times jokes went flat and Carson's ability to "rescue" the jokes brought out his real talent. There's a video clip of a time when he made a joke that drew almost dead silence (even from Ed), but he managed to evoke a laugh with his ad-libbed followup.[1]

This all reminds me of this one (which I'm sure even Carson never stooped to): "If you get up on the left side of a horse, where do you get down?" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:52, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Italian food

July is the anniversary of what Itakian dish? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inairene (talk • contribs) 12:12, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July was named for Julius Caesar, so I'll guess it's Caesar Salad. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:24, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I read somewhere on the Internet that the Caesar Salad is not named after Julius. :) Kayau Voting IS evil 12:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nor is it an Italian dish. Just another classic BB answer, then. --Viennese Waltz ^talk 13:21, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was a joke.Aaronite (talk) 19:08, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and a really stupid and unfunny one at that, quite apart from the fact that the RD is not the place for jokes. The sooner this one editor stops treating this place as a playground for his own desperate attempts at humour the better. --Viennese Waltz ^talk 07:15, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The OP appears to be posing a quiz question, so it's wide open. Like maybe it's Orange Julius. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:11, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd go with Bugs answer. --Dweller (talk) 20:48, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gina Lollobrigida born 4 July 1927. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:41, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By Jove, I think you've got it. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:45, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Living in a flat or apartment

Perhaps due to being an educated person living in a house in a blue-collar area, I've sometimes had upsetting aggression from machismo neighbours over the years. This has set me thinking of how to live without neighbours. One solution would be to live in the country surrounded by fields - but this is very expensive in the UK. The other option would be to move into a flat or apartment without any garden.

I've never lived in a flat or apartment for any length of time - but is it usual to go for years without having any contact with neighbours rather than perhaps the ocassional smile? Thanks 92.29.121.86 (talk) 13:14, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that living in a flat would mean living without neighbours. You would still have neighbours – the people in the flats above and below you. --Viennese Waltz ^talk 13:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in Hong Kong, neighbours usually don't talk or smile unless they know each other. I only know the family right next to me, because I take piano lessons there. :) Kayau Voting IS evil 13:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your education need not provoke your neighbors, even if they are not similarly educated or employed in a way corresponding to a higher level of education. Do you appreciate your "blue-color" neighbors? Is there anything likable about them? If you dislike them for their intellectual indistinctiveness, perhaps they sense this and the consequence is a less-than-perfect relationship neighbor-wise. Bus stop (talk) 13:31, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could try techniques to develop better social skills; or try using your education to find better remunerated employment which would allow you to move to a more congenial neighbourhood. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:56, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both of the above comments imply a lack of wordly experience - I expect they are still living with their parents. 92.28.252.229 (talk) 09:04, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that, in fact, I have considerably more years than you. My point was to suggest that you may wish to consider that, perhaps, your neighbours might consider you arrogant, aloof, stand-offish, snobbish - that's certainly the impression conveyed by some of your comments here. Lighten up, improve your social skills, and enjoy your life. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:31, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Some of your comments here" - what would they be? 92.24.178.254 (talk) 19:44, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm US, not UK, and this is definitely a cultural thing, but- my experience with apartment buildings is that 'cordial strangers' is the usual relationship with one's neighbor. Exchanges of pleasantries in the elevator are usual ("Hi, how are you? How about that local sports team? Boy, the rain sure is wet"), but people are generally not expecting, or interested in, meaningful friendship with the neighbors. "Upsetting agression from machismo neighbors" is something I'm having trouble visualizing. What are we talking about here? Randomly challenging you to a fistfight on the front lawn? Arguing over the placement of a fence? Borrowing your lawnmower and refusing to refuel it? Beating up your children? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm imagining a mixture of grown-up chavs and the inhabitants of Royston Vasey. There are many, many parts of the UK which are horrible to live in because of the insular nature of the locals. Sometimes this is a matter of rich snobbery, but usually it's coupled to poverty and general despair (and, I would say, learned helplessness). Outsiders will be aggressed with muttered comments, and deliberately annoying actions (such as tapping on the windows and pestering you for cigarettes, or the use of loud music and other means of being generally intrusive and upsetting without doing anything specifically bad); possibly escalating to shouted comments and a bit of vandalism or robbery if they really want rid of you. The thing is, there is often a corresponding nice area on the other side of the same town. I would recommend making a bee-line for this area rather than attempting to hide in a flat, which will be an unpleasant experience in a rough area and just leads to a siege mentality. (You might need to choose a tiny flat in order to be able to afford to live in the nice area, but that's another matter.) 213.122.48.55 (talk) 15:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In Romania if you live in flats or apartments you usually only say hi to the neigbors and that's it. If you live in a house with a yard surrounded by neighbors they seem to think it's ok to meddle in your private life constantly. Rimush (talk) 19:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"is it usual to go for years without having any contact with neighbours rather than perhaps the ocassional smile?" In the UK? That's pretty much the default, unless you make a conscious effort to get to know people. If you and the neighbours have children, you usually get to know them a little more. Otherwise, like you say, years with only the occasional smile and brief weather-based exchange. 86.164.66.83 (talk) 11:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It must give you a great feeling of security - once the front door is closed, nobody is going to disturb you or be watching you. Apart from playing loud music. 92.24.178.254 (talk) 19:48, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheese slices in a bus-shaped box

In my youth, I remember slices of processed cheese coming in a box the "shape" (or at least decorated like one) of a bus. I need a picture of one and am having no luck with google. This was in New Zealand, btw. Can anyone help me? Aaadddaaammm (talk) 14:28, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It might be Velveeta, which comes in a bright yellow long thin box (not sure if it is sold outside NA), but I can't find a photo of the box on wikipedia anywhere. Googlemeister (talk) 16:08, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, going in the right direction, but this was presliced and individually wrapped slices of cheese. Any more suggestions? Aaadddaaammm (talk) 07:04, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't rule out the possibility that Velveeta produced and marketed individually wrapped slices. -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chicken eggs

My sister keeps a few chickens. They lay eggs that are far nicer than anything the local supermarket sells. However, while most of the chickens lay "normal" eggs (brown, smooth, egg-shaped), one appears to lay pale, rough-surfaced, more oval shaped eggs which are considerably larger then the others. Since they all share the same chicken coop, eat the same food and run around the same yard, I am puzzled why one chicken's eggs are so different. Is such variation in eggs usual, or should my sister be concerned that there is something "wrong" with one of her chickens? Astronaut (talk) 15:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about the texture and shape, but the colour is genetic. --Tango (talk) 15:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are the chickens all the same age and the same breed? Googlemeister (talk) 16:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As Tango and Googlemeister have hinted, egg colour, size (and presumably to an extent shape) are characteristics that vary between different breeds of chicken just as their general appearance and size does, and since chickens will readily cross-breed, a given chicken could be a hybrid and exhibit the appearance of one breed but the egg characteristics of another. Its also true that diet and health can have effects on egg appearance, but if the "odd layer" shares the common diet of her coop-mates, and does not show any other signs of ill-health, then individual variation is the most likely explanation. However, your sister ought to have access to a Veterinarian with a knowledge of poultry, whom she should consult if she has any concerns about the health of the bird in question, as well as that of those consuming the eggs. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 16:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a picture of those eggs? --Belchman (talk) 16:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This informative paper, which is aimed at commercial producers, lists the following causes of a rough texture:

Inherited
Newcastle disease or infectious bronchitis
Excessive use of antibiotics
Excess calcium consumption by the hens
Copper deficiency

I would think that for backyard chickens the answer is almost certainly #1. Your sister would notice #2, almost certainly doesn't engage in #3, and #4 and #5 are unlikely for birds with access to grass and bugs. I think the eggs you're describing are just natural variations that most people have never seen because they would be disqualified from the higher grades that are allowed to be sold in supermarkets. --Sean 18:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

or possibly one of your chickens is a duck. have you looked closely? --Ludwigs2 20:11, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Viaduct? 87.81.230.195 (talk) 00:17, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not a duck. As far as I can tell, they are all the same breed (they all look like these ones), but I'm no expert. They used have the run of the garden, but since they ate all the grass, they have been restricted to a smaller gravelled yard where they can scratch around while my sister enjoys her replanted lawn. While it could be inherited, I think there is something in Sean's hint about excess calcium, especially if one of the birds was eating the gravel. Astronaut (talk) 03:41, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

She should tractor them. They'll get good food to eat and won't get parasites which they're likely to get if they're stuck on one dirt patch, and the lawn will be happy and safe. --Sean 16:11, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bicycling down a hill

So, I bought my bicycle! I did go with a not-electric hybrid bicycle, from the bike shop. It's pretty sexy. Go, me. I decided that the health benefits were important, even if I did end up just driving it to a bike path that's easier to ride than my own steep hill. But I'd still love to make commuting a goal. I have a plan for riding up the steep hill- ride as far as I can, then walk the rest of the way, and try to do better tomorrow. But riding down the steep hill, with cars sharing the road, scares me a little. Is the best strategy (a) gently pump the brake to slow myself a bit, (b) gently ride the brake to slow myself a bit, or (c) just hold on tight, leave the brake alone, yell 'cowabunga!' and hope for the best? -17:57, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Addendum: I have already figured out that 'shift to the highest gear' is probably part of the plan. I'm still working out the shifting thing, but 'low gears for uphill, middle gears for flat ground, high gears for downhill' seems to be how they work... -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You want to try to keep your pedaling rate more or less constant. Beginners and many amateurs find a rate of about 60 RPM comfortable. However, if you have some ambitions, try for 90 RPM - it's more exhausting in the beginning, but better utilizes all muscle groups. Many professionals use rates between 90 RMP and 120 RMP. Pick the gear that feels comfortable. As for downhill, that very much depends on local conditions. I can only give three hints: First, be careful about crossings. If you have the right of way, approach with outward confidence, but don't assume drivers have seen you and yield unless you have established clear eye contact. Go for a Doc Holiday expression, be ready to brake, but show no signs of that ;-). Secondly, do not ride the brake. You will heat up whatever components do the braking (probably rims and pads), with potentially bad consequences. Depending on the type of brakes, this may mean loss of braking power or bursting tires. The worst case is unlikely in an urban setting, but it's better to not get into bad habits. Consider this: The energy you need to dissipate is always the same for a given hill. But air resistance grows with (roughly) the third power of speed. So the faster you go, the more energy is lost to air resistance, and the less energy wears down your brake pads ;-). Thirdly, be confident enough to ride well clear of the gutter - about 1 m off the bank of the road (or of parking cars) is the minimum recommended distance. Regarding "cowabunga", my personal record is 86 km/h on a mountain bike (down the Spitzingsattel in the Bavarian Alps, on a wide, well-maintained road) and 84 km/h on my trekking bike, down the SP204 (Strada Valsugana) in Trento, Italy. Few people find these speeds safe or sane. I was younger then... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 18:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Schulz, your Spitzingsattel link goes to a lake. If you can ride that fast in a lake, that is quite impressive, but in case that is an error, I am giving you a heads up. Googlemeister (talk) 19:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's intentional, as we do not have the equivalent to Spitzingsattel here. The lake is high up in the mountains, the Sattel is the pass leading up to it (or down from it, in this case ;-). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 20:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brake more on the rear wheel than the front wheel, otherwise you may go flying over the handlebars. 92.29.121.86 (talk) 18:44, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is extremely unlikely. It's much easier to lock the rear wheel, which, at least for inexperienced riders, will result in loss of control. It's usually recommended to apply brake power roughly 75% to the front wheels, 25% to the rear wheel. See Bicycle brake systems#Braking_technique. Be sure to brace yourself against the deceleration. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 18:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's unlikely if you're gradually feathering. If you "slam on the brakes" to stop suddenly, or misjudge "pumping", though, it can happen. If you're already decending a decent grade, it doesn't take long for inertia to carry your center of gravity over the top of the front wheel. This happened to me - I was coasting down a short but steep hill, and had only one hand on the front brakes (the other was adjusting my glasses). I lost control, panicked, and pressed too hard on the brakes (front only), and went sailing over the handlebars. Luckily, I got away with only a scuffed bike and a bruised ego. Moral of the story - if you want to stop, use both brakes. (And keep both hands on the handlebars.) -- 140.142.20.229 (talk) 22:52, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The second is the critical point. With one hand on the side of the handlebar, you cannot brace yourself. So, yes, if you suddenly brake then, your body will go forward. But it's not (well, rarely, as the scars on my left shin tell me ;-) the bicycle flipping over. Braking with both brakes is, of course, a good guarantee that you will have both hands on the handlebar. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 07:21, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely (a). By the way, Sheldon Brown (bicycle mechanic) was of the opinion that you should almost never use the back brake, except if the front one fails - something about efficiency and reducing wear and tear, I forget. My own back brake has been broken for a few months now and I regularly go down a steep hill, pulsing the front one when the speed gets too alarming. This is of course unsafe, but only because if the front brake breaks I'm out of options. 213.122.27.128 (talk) 19:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's the grade on your steep hill, by the way? (If you don't know, just register at mapmyride.com and enter the route; it'll figure it out for you. Maybe don't map it all the way to your house, so that you don't tell everyone on the internet your address.) --Trovatore (talk) 02:15, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, what a cool web site! I'm going to bookmark that. I'm sure where to find the grade as a percentage, but I'd be riding the hill for 0.8 mile, during which time it changes 322 feet. Is that impressive, or not so much? [added] Oh, I think I found it- 17%? It seems pretty damn steep to me, but I do see people bicycling it. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:21, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something's wrong somewhere. 0.8 mile is about 4000 feet, so that's only about an 8% grade if your distance and elevation-change figures are right. 17% is a fairly vicious climb. I can do it but not for very long. --Trovatore (talk) 02:24, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure I did something wrong. I'm skilled at that. I'm not thrilled about sending even a map of my neighborhood to the whole internet, so I emailed you the link to the route. 'A fairly vicious climb' seems like a fair description. 'Memorable hill' is the way it's labeled in my local cycling map. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:33, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You do have a 17% stretch for a short bit in the middle there. Only for a couple hundred yards, but still, yeah, you're going to feel that. --Trovatore (talk) 02:52, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Commuting is one of my cycling goals... but I want to work toward goals that build my leg muscles and my skill at not falling off a little more first. It would be cool if I could rise to the challenge... but I don't know whether I will succeed. At least TO work is down, and FROM work is up. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 03:25, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you could always get off and walk the steep bit. --Trovatore (talk) 03:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hee- which brings us full circle to my opening question. :) Yes, walking when I run out of steam is part of the plan. I'm more worried now about crashing and dying going down it, than having a heart attack and dying going up it. Obviously, whatever does not kill us makes us stronger, so those are my only worries. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 04:33, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'd probably dismount before that stretch in the middle even going down, at least until I was used to it. I checked my own favorite ride and the steepest section I could find over 100 meters or so was about 12%. I feel well in control going down that, but 17% is a big jump over 12%. --Trovatore (talk) 05:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I didn't really believe the numbers I was seeing for my ride, and having looked into it a little with Google Earth, I no longer trust the MapMyRide numbers. They're probably correct for the averages over the long distances, but I don't think they're getting the steep local sections right.

You can see my ride (slightly modified not to reveal my actual residence) at http://beta.mapmyride.com/route/detail/19001988/ . If you undock the map (click on the little arrow pointing to the upper right) and then click on the "elevation" button, it shows nothing (climbing) over 10%. Even if you export the raw elevation data, I couldn't find any 100m stretch over about 11% or so.

That didn't seem right, so I went to Google Earth and looked at it. There's a stretch of roughly 470 ft where you gain 95 ft -- that's about a 20% grade. You can check it yourself if you want -- it's from 37 17' 30.40 N 122 05' 25.47 W to 37 17' 26.48 N 122 05' 27.56 W, going from 1013 ft elevation to 1108 ft.

On the other hand, on your route, the raw data shows a 100m stretch of 23%. I don't see an easy way to figure out exactly where that is on the map. But guesstimating, and looking at where there weren't any houses (just before that left curve), I found where I thought it should be, and it looks like you gain 33 feet out of 400 horizontal, only about 8% ! Maybe I'm not finding the steepest spot. --Trovatore (talk) 08:10, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I should just take the bus to work, and enjoy my new bicycle in other places. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:41, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No chickening out! ;-). Seriously, just try it. Descending even 17% on a paved road is neither particularly hard nor dangerous. And after a few weeks there mere thought of sitting in a loud, stinking, fuel-guzzling tin can will seem abhorrent... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 16:09, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the Reference Desk says I can do it reasonably safely, then yes, I'll give it a try. I trust the Reference Desk. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:10, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

^{[citation needed]} Matt Deres (talk) 16:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, so this is why I want to know about the numbers on the rides I know. If the section of Montebello Road whose coordinates I gave above is really a 20% grade, as Google Earth says, then I agree, going down a 20% grade is not too bad once you know what to expect. On the other hand if it's only 10 or 11%, as MapMyRide seems to claim, then I don't want anything to do with 20%. Coming out the other side on Page Mill Road, MapMyRide can't find more than about 12% descending, but I see a stretch on Google Earth that seems to be about 16%. --Trovatore (talk) 18:06, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's some pretty bad advice above, I think. Okay, first, this is only an 8% grade on average, which is not that steep. (A 20% grade is truly wicked.) On a hybrid bike, which is more stable than a road bike and won't go as fast, you should be able to just let it fly, as long as there aren't places where you may have to come to a full stop in a short distance. Make sure to wear a helmet and make sure the bike is in good mechanical condition, including the tires. Riding the brakes for such a long drop is very bad because they can overheat and melt, which makes them useless. On steep parts, try to shift your weight toward the back of the bike, and focus any braking you have to do on the rear wheel. Looie496 (talk) 18:48, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the consensus among serious riders is that you're wrong about the rear-wheel thing. --Trovatore (talk) 19:30, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are lots of factors here. If you know what you're doing, using the front brake is more effective and efficient. But if your weight is too far forward and the hill is steep, jamming down on the front brake can send you over the handlebars. The worst that can happen if your rear wheel locks up is that you slide. It also matters what kind of bike you're on. A hybrid places your center of gravity higher with respect to the wheelbase than a road bike does. A mountain bike, even more so. Looie496 (talk) 19:52, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If your rear wheel locks up and you haven't developed the instincts for it, you may well fall, especially if you're going around a curve.

I probably use more rear brake than is generally recommended for a different reason, which is that my front brake tends to chatter — it can get bad enough that I lose my grip on the brake lever. --Trovatore (talk) 20:17, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vanity sizing for men

The waist size of jeans that fit me best is about six inches less than my actual waist size. Is vanity sizing for men's jeans common? Thanks 92.29.121.86 (talk) 18:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Six inches is a lot of vanity sizing... are you sure you are measuring your waist correctly? Here are some instructions. It's important to get the level of the tape measure right, it should level with your belly button. It may well be that the actual circumference of the jeans isn't the same as the stated waist size, since the jeans might be designed to be worn lower than the waist. --Tango (talk) 20:57, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am sure thanks 92.15.12.218 (talk) 19:45, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Different manufacturers seem to have different shapes of cut and interpretation of measurement, but six inches sounds extreme. Six centimetres would be more likely. Do you wear your jeans extremely tight, or are you a very unusual shape? no offence intended Dbfirs 00:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that you're measuring your waist and wearing your jeans on your hips or vice-versa is it? --203.202.43.53 (talk) 03:03, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wearing jeans lower would give the opposite discrepancy between measurements unless the OP has a very large beer belly. Dbfirs 06:50, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reckon a 15cm difference between printed size and actual size is far less likely than a beer belly. OP: Have you tried measuring the waist of the pants? --203.202.43.53 (talk) 06:07, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When is vanity autobiography allowed (example given)?

<Discussion has been moved to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, which is a more appropriate venue. Please continue discussion there --Jayron32 00:47, 30 July 2010 (UTC)>[reply]