Miscellaneous desk
< August 19	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 21 >

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.

August 20

6 shapes puzzle

Does anyone know the solution? If anyone knows the solution to this puzzle please post it on this article (6 shapes puzzle) If the article already exists under a diferent name, please link this name to the article and delete my poorly made one. Zantaggerung 03:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, is this what you are intending to ask about? - hydnjo talk 04:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No he meant 6 shapes puzzle (tired?)!87.102.2.76 12:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This: http://www.snafooz.com/ ???

If so, I have a computer program that solves it (and provides several different solutions). I used to often use that puzzle as an employment interviewing question: "How would you write a program to solve this puzzle?"

Atlant 14:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(To which the correct answer is: "I would demand a written set of requirements, then I would go and sit somewhere quietly and think about it without the pressure of a job interviewer breathing down my neck!"...sadly, job interviewers seldom require the correct answer.) SteveBaker 15:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I might very well have accepted that answer! ;-) Someone smart enough to know that a programmer needs a clear statement of requirements is someone who knows a lot more than many candidates who came walking through the door. My question was usually phrased just as open-endedly as I stated it above; the point was to see how the candidate approached the problem, not to see if they could instantly write optimal code.

Atlant 16:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep - I know what you mean. At a job interview I did about 3 months ago some annoying interviewer asked me to write a function to test whether a string is 'symmetrical'. I explained that ordinarily, I'd write a loop that iterated in from the ends - but then I'd fall into his little 'off by one' trap that he'd carefully laid for me - so instead I'd wrote him a recursive solution that said "A string is symmetrical if it's shorter than two characters or if the first character and the last letter are the same and the string between them is symmetrical." - it was two lines of code - and in truth, a pretty stupid solution but it made it REALLY easy for me to be sure I got it right first time and avoided the inevitable annoying follow-on "How to you know you don't have an off-by-one". The stupid interviewer didn't understand what I wrote - then he claimed it wouldn't work - eventually, he typed it in, compiled it and convinced himself it did work. He seemed disappointed. Sadly, that took him so long that he didn't get to ask me anything else before I was shuttled onto the next guy! SteveBaker 02:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Faces

Where can i find a blank face on the internet to print out, like a overall frame of a face but with no features on it.

I wonder if this site may be of use to you (note: you'll need Java to access it). --jjron 07:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No java can you give me something else please?

File:TotoBaggins-George-W-Bush.jpeg

Paging Dan Quayle.

How about this? --Sean 19:31, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lol Acceptable 01:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How it it possible to be faceless and two-faced at the same time? SteveBaker 02:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Easy. --Sean 04:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Give me a face like an entirely black one or white blank one not a face of a real person!!!

What does USAIA stands for?

I found this picture with the emblem at the upper right corner and I cannot explain what it is. The inscription reads "Intelligence and Threat ... Mission and Excellence". Does it have to do with US Army in action (which I doubted)? -- Scriberius 08:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

United States Army Intelligence Agency (its headquarters were taken over by the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command in 1978 but I don't see when USAIA was disbanded.) Or if, as this page mentions it still in 1988. [1] Rmhermen 08:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- Scriberius 21:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bank of Ireland ATM's

For anyone who has been to ireland before are Visa debit cards from the united states able to be used with bank of ireland's ATM's--logger 09:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but there are hidden charges levied by banks that can add up to quite a bit. It would be best to take travellers cheques, and shop around for suitable exchange rates. Hornplease 09:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Depending which bank you are with in the States, there's usually one that will have some kind of reciprocal agreement with an Irish bank. Then you'll only pay a small exchange commission, saving quite a bit from what the equivalent value traveller's cheques will set you back. Either way it'll cost you more than a year or two ago thanks to the dollar plummeting in value against the Euro and the pound. Neil ム 14:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Visa will work in almost all Irish ATMs, most ATMs don't have an additional charge for use and the few that do will tel you before you use them ( in which case move on to the next one which is likely to be quite close by if your in any half decent sized town). Obviously the exchange rate isn't great at the moment though, but that obstacle wont be overcome with travelers cheques. In fact knowing Irish banks it'll only add hassle due to short opening hours and long ques.194.125.179.10 17:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In my experience, banks offer better exchange rates on ATM transactions overseas than they do to buy travelers' checks, fees (in both cases) included. If your bank charges a fee per transaction for foreign ATM transactions, your best course would be to maximize each withdrawal. That is, take out your daily withdrawal maximum or the amount you are comfortable carrying (whichever is less) each time you use the ATM overseas. This will minimize transaction fees as a percentage of your total withdrawal. (The same applies for credit cards, which tend to offer worse exchange rates than banks offer for ATM cash withdrawals.) Marco polo 00:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the info will just have to be ready for all this.--logger 07:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tyson

I still can,t understand why tyson bit the ear of Holyfield?

Did you read the Mike Tyson article? It states "Tyson later stated that it was retaliation for Holyfield repeatedly head butting him without penalty.", and notes that he bit both ears. Presumably he bit a little too hard on the second occasion. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tuscany

tuscanys imports and exports

I want to crack a joke,can I?Did someone kill you in the middle of your question.

Did you not ask this before? Tuscany#Economy might be a good start. SaundersW 10:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at it and there was crap cant you give me a chart or somthing

Richard Gere

I want to know the real height of Richard Gere.Is he only 5'10?He seems a lot taller than that.218.248.2.51 09:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)Ecclesiasticalparanoid[reply]

IMDB puts Richard Gere at 5' 10½" (1.79 m). Many male actors "seem" taller because the movie makers intentionally foster that illusion, by using shorter actresses and minor characters and even, in some cases, having the stars walk on higher surfaces than the rest of the cast. StuRat 11:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Ladd stood on wooden boxes in static shots. Corvus cornix 15:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In old cowboy movies, they would build the entire town 10% smaller than usual to make the actors look six inches taller. SteveBaker 15:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of it is also in choosing very careful composition; compare Tom Cruise's official wedding photo [2] with a picture of him with Katie Holmes at a film première [3]. A similar effect is sometimes done with Gere; a perspective distorting lens makes him look larger than Alfred Molina in this image], when in fact he is much smaller. Laïka 21:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

7" vinyl/sleeve question

I've been through Single(music) and Record sleeve to no effect,so here goes :)

1.What was the most recent UK No.1 to be available on 7" vinyl?

I've got a copy of Prince's Most Beautiful Girl in the World from 1994 on vinyl before CD's took over,but now with vinyl re-emerging there may have been others released.

2.Which was the first UK No.1 to have a specific picture sleeve as opposed to the record label one?

The earliest I have is Donny Osmond's Young Love from 1972,but again I'm sure there must have been earlier ones.

Thanx Lemon martini 11:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vinyl is re-emerging ? Why, are people nostalgic for static and pops in their music ? StuRat 11:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scratching maybe? You need real special hardware to do that with CD's and with MP3's you can do it using software - but the subtleties of the tactile feel of the actual turntable would be missing. SteveBaker 13:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bicycle chain positioning

Are bike chains always on the right side of the bike? If so, why? Most trends are bucked: why not this one? Why no Product differentiation? --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:33, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you can manufacture your own bike parts -you can make one that goes on the left - but if you already have one that works perfectly on the right - why go to the expense of retooling? That is why..87.102.2.76 11:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget that the clutch in the freewheel would have to operate in reverse as well. And if it's a bike with derailleur gears, all those parts would have to be mirrow-imaged as well. It'd be a lot of work for essentially no gain.

Atlant 14:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(reconsider you freewheel/clutch statement? - it's the same????) otherwise I agree87.102.2.76 14:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that's the case, try it. ;-)

Atlant 14:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes. But derailleur are not standardised - people like Trek have mountings that don't fit other people's bikes. Clip-pedals are not standardised. Frames ditto. Cranks ditto. I guess the wider question is, what is & what is not standardised on a bike & why? --Tagishsimon (talk)

"Breasts of a virgin"

"Breasts of a virgin" - What does this mean? Is there a symbol for this? Thanks.

Alchemy? see here http://books.google.com/books?id=NOcY_p6bz_0C&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&dq=%22breasts+of+a+virgin%22&source=web&ots=vbcKND8kRE&sig=7IfcbXDA4-vx8Ikl9K5P2Dah7Bc

It seems that alchemists had much use for 'virgins milk' - maybe a web search on that would give you the answers you seek.87.102.2.76 14:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this even possible? o_o --⁪froth^t 14:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently. - Eron ^Talk 15:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page might be of more interest to budding alchemists [[4]] Ezekial 23:21-"If friends or family members fondle a virgin’s breasts she should resist the attention, and the delight that bruising her teats imparts" - so now you know.87.102.2.76 18:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is not what the verse says. The real Ezekiel 23:21 is "Thus thou didst call to remembrance the lewdness of thy youth, when they from Egypt bruised thy breasts for the bosom of thy youth." - simply put Oholibah was fondled by Egyptian men - no lactation is implied. Jon513 22:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also "lac virginis" + "alchemy" would be another search...87.102.2.76 14:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One wonders where they heck the alchemists got the idea that this would help from? SteveBaker 15:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps they were just seeking a kind of job satisfaction. --Tagishsimon (talk)

The above-linked image seems to me to be the Virgin, not just a virgin. (Liebfraumilch, anyone?) Rmhermen 16:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This phrase (or some similar phrase) is oft times used to describe firm but-modestly-sized mounds. For example, the twinned Uncanoonuc Mountains in New Hampshire [5] are usually (and possibly apocryphally) described as being named for the "Maiden's breasts" in some local native American dialect; viewed from a distance, the story at least sounds plausible.

And then there's Liebfraumilch.

Atlant 16:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"The BREASTS OF THE VIRGIN are sweet shaped as teats (" minni "), fulls with zuccata paste of pumpkin ) to the jasmin. Their production happens for the festivity of the Deads ( november,2) in Sicily." Ritual artistic foods in Italy SaundersW 17:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jet propelled aeroplanes vs Propellor propelled aeroplanes?

I live under the landing approach path to a Scottish airport and can't help but notice the significant number of propellor propelled aircraft flying over and am curious to know why, in this day of fast and efficient jet-propelled aircraft, anyone would choose the former. Just curious.81.145.240.52 14:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propeller-equipped engines are notably less expensive. Also, at lower speeds, propellers are more efficient than turbojet engines. Remember that many of the "propeller" planes that you see are actually using turboshaft engines to drive the props.

Atlant 14:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps turboprop and turbofan would be worth looking at - the turboprop article turboprop#Technological aspects starts to explain why a turboprop might be better - I could also guess that a propellor aircraft (if it is a '4 stroke') would be a lot cheaper to make..87.102.2.76 14:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And cheaper to maintain.87.102.2.76 14:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't some prop planes land on Scottish islands which are too small to take a jet sized runway?Could explain why you see so many there.hotclaws 16:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I asked a pilot, who by coincidence flies scottish routes out of Glasgow. His response:

Its all about fuel efficiency versus altitude:

Different engines are more/less efficient at different altitudes (due air pressure / temperature decrease with altitude)

(and for short sectors there is an absolute limit on how high you can climb before you have to start coming down again)

At low level ( < 20,000 feet) Turboprops score (e.g. the venerable SAAB 340)

Mid level (20 - 30) looking at high ratio bypass fan/jet (most air goes round the outside of the combustion chamber)

Upper (25+ ) Low ratio bypass (most air goes through combustion chamber)

High up (35 +) Pure jet (Concorde / Eurofighter / Tornado)

All engines are a 'jet' driving a prop - a turbo prop is one extreme - most thrust comes from the fan pushing air back, as we climb higher the economics and physics change such that a fan jet is more economic (miles per Kg)

Basically a "fan jet" is a turbo prop in a tube - and as you climb higher you make the tube smaller and the jet bigger - till eventually you get an olympus (concorde / QE2 engine) where all thrust is generated by the 'exhaust' from the jet.

2. You ain't never going to land an airbus on the shetlands, and if you put two Rolls Royce trent engines on a 35 seater - it will perform like a sports car ... but be a little inefficient.

(thanks Ian) --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All engines are a 'jet' driving a prop

Even a ramjet? ;-) --Atlant 13:08, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to presume he meant all jets in his list. Strangely, the wankel engine comes to mind. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Recharging car battery

Modern car batteries can be recharged by driving the car around. What specific part of the car is charging the battery? I'm guessing it must be a rotating part of the car such as the wheels or the cylinder crankshafts. Acceptable 15:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alternator#Automotive_alternators 69.95.50.15 15:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) The engine crank-shaft drives an alternator, normally via a belt. Thus the car wheels do not need to be moving to generate power. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Right - the car doesn't have to be moving. If your battery needs to be recharged (eg after you've been jump-started) - then the best bet is to turn off all the electrical systems (the radio, the heater/AC fan and especially the headlights), put the transmission into neutral and rev the engine up to 2500 rpms or so. If the battery is in reasonable shape, it'll recharge enough to restart the car within just a few minutes and be fully recharged in 10 minutes. It's not just modern car batteries though - even cars from as far back as the 1950's could charge their own batteries. Strictly speaking some cars from the 1960's and earlier (eg the Mk I Mini) had generators rather than alternators (the difference is fairly subtle though). A few odd-ball cars (eg the Isetta) have used the starter motor as the alternator/generator - but the principle is the same. SteveBaker 15:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had to call you on that "...be fully charged in 10 minutes." Just to get some numbers, I looked at a typical (small) replacement car battery, the Sears DieHard Gold North [6]

which gave a capacity of 700 CCA (Cold Cranking Amps) and a Reserve Capacity of 120 RC. But, what does that mean? This site [7] says that CCA is how much current, in amps, the battery can put out for 30 seconds at 0°C, and RC is how long, in minutes, the battery can put out 25 amps continuously. So, this battery has a capacity of roughly 60 amp-hours at a high discharge rate, and only 50 amp-hours at a low rate. Okay, we know how much energy it can store.

Now, how fast can an alternator recharge it? A new oversized SUV I'm looking at (because my wife wants one) [8] gives 160 amps as the alternator rating. Okay, for the sake of argument, let's assume that this new, powerful alternator has to recharge this new, small battery from dead. It has nothing else to do, and there's no resistance anywhere in the circuit, so it charges at it's rated 160 amps. It will take this theoretical system 50 amp-hours/160 amps ~ 1/3 hours to charge.

Note all the bad assumptions: Big alternator, small battery, no other use for alternator, no resistance in the system. And you get 20 minutes. When you put together a matched electrical system, many other electrical loads, and the fact that the battery doesn't WANT to be charged -you have to force it- you don't get anywhere near this theoretical limit. For a normal, real-world US car, it's safer to assume 10-20 minutes of charging before it's safe to drive off, and a good couple of hours or more for a full charge. -SandyJax

So if you shift into neutral and rev your engine, are you recharging your batteries?

EDIT: Oh ok, thanks Acceptable 15:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You're also charging the battery as you drive along - but if your battery is dead you don't want to risk stalling the car and getting stuck all over again - so you are best advised to let it recharge some before you drive off. SteveBaker 15:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revving your engine some will help, if it's idling slowly and having trouble powering the loaded-down alternator. But, the alternator has a voltage regulator, so past the bare minimum to run the alternator is just wasting gas. How much is the bare minimum? Put a voltmeter on the battery. When voltage stops going up, that's it; the regulator has kicked in. Remember, the car's designers put that charging system in. The engine and alternator SHOULD charge the battery at idle. If you have to rev the engine up to make it charge, then that's not your battery's fault. You need to look at your idle setting, or your charging system is faulty. -SandyJax

Fast gear changes

When you are trying to shift gears as quickly as possible, such as in a race, is the jerk you feel after you re-engage the clutch inevitable? When I shift quickly and re-engage the clutch, I feel a sudden jerk. Do professional drivers also experience this? Acceptable 15:37, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No - it's not inevitable! It's a sign that you don't yet know how to drive stick! When you shift gears, when the transmission is (briefly) in neutral, you are supposed to adjust the gas pedal to match the rpm's to the gear you are about to enter. This means adding a little more gas when you down-shift and easing up a bit on the gas when you up-shift. Failure to do this will result in premature clutch and transmission wear...not to mention whiplash injuries if you are driving a performance car! (Note to self: Don't let Acceptable near Tigger!) SteveBaker 15:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Steve, your explanation isn't complete. On upshifts, for a "jerk-free" shift, you have to stay de-clutched until the engine speed drops to match the new, lower RPM of the clutch disk. Because cars contain no technology to actively decelerate the engine, this takes time (usually, a half-second to a second) as the engine "engine-brakes" itself. But if you're shifting in such as way as to get the fastest accelleration out of the car, you won't wait that time; you'll simply shift, release the clutch, and nail the throttle again, accepting the jerk that occurs as the engine very rapidly transfers its excess momentum to the driveline. As you observed, it's tough on the car and tough on the occupants of the car, but it's optimum for fastest acceleration.

Atlant 16:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes...kinda. Actually, to make the story complete: If you are trying to really get the best possible accelleration, you'll shift at the point where the torque in the gear you are in now will be identical to the torque in the new gear. That means that if you can't match the revs during the shift (which you really can't when you're racing), you have to shift a bit earlier in order to meet my criteria for the perfect shift. But if you nail it perfectly, the car won't jerk because it has torque-limited accelleration and it's already accellerating as fast as it can. It's kinda fun to deliberately miss perfection in a car with a really high-torque engine because you can get the tyres to sqeak on every up-shift. It blows the minds of people riding with you - but it's not optimal! SteveBaker 02:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a PC called Tigger. I'm not letting Acceptable anywhere near that either. Capuchin 16:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it orange with black stripes like my Tigger?

No, it just bounces and talks nonsense. Capuchin 09:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, jerk (a sudden change in the rate of acceleration) will occur if you're trying to get up to max speed as quickly as possible and don't want to take time to slowly increase the rate of acceleration from zero after each shift. Yes, it's hard on the transmission, but hey, if you're racing for the title (on an approved race course, of course), that's a relatively minor concern. StuRat 16:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't worry about abusing your clutch. I do this to mine all the time, and judging by the smell, it's in perfectly fine shape. Friday (talk) 16:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, so if you are trying to drive as smoothly as possible, then waiting that half-second for the engine RPM's to drop down is inevitable? If so, how should one do this? Should the car be left in neutral for the half second and quickly shifted into the next gear once the RPM's drop down? Or should the car be quickly shifted into the next gear and slowly disengage, while slipping, the clutch? thanks. Acceptable 17:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No - you can drive smoothely without that. It's on the down-shift that there is a problem. Most people are thinking about slowing down when they down-shift and pushing DOWN on the throttle is the last thing they're thinking of. On the up-shift, torque limitations tends to avoid a jerk in most 'family' cars...certainly in higher gears. SteveBaker 02:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, you 1) depress the clutch while simultaneously releasing the throttle, 2) make your shift while the engine decelerates, and 3) as the engine RPM crosses downwards through what will be the new "engaged" RPM, you release the clutch and re-apply the throttle. The exact timings of the operation vary from car to car, of course.

Atlant 17:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Torque converter anyone?87.102.2.76 18:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We're talking about stick-shift cars. Automatics need all sorts of junk to make them work. SteveBaker 02:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Different dashboard styles

Is there a name for the style of car dashboards that place the Speedometer in the middle of the front dashboard (like a Mini Cooper), as opposed to the traditional behind-the-steering-wheel placement? Acceptable 17:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this is referred to as "silly marketing gimmick". ;-) Friday (talk) 17:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rally car? I think that's where the whole "putting the gauges in the middle" comes from --lucid 17:57, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect in the original minis it was a case of "where will it fit?" DuncanHill 19:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of both styles? Acceptable 22:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I expect the advantage of 'steering wheel' based is that a simple glance down allows you to see your display panel, the disadvantage of the central-located dial is that it is slightly more work to see. An advantage of central-dials could be that it is easier for passengers to see your speed than traditional dials. I expect that central-located dials could (depending on design) be more suspectible to 'glare' than the traditional style. The normal dash can sometimes be obstructed by your steering wheel though which shouldn't be an issue with a central location. There are many 'fancy' cars that now 'project' your speed to a part of your screen where you will be looking through whilst driving - meaning you need to look down less and therefore should be able to concentrate better. I expect that the safety impact of central V non-central is small, otherwise there would be regulation to make them not allowed on newly designed cars (the breadth of design-regulation for vehicles is breathtaking) ny156uk 22:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh! oooh! I know this! Ask me! Ask me! (I have both classic Mini and modern MINI's - and I wrote the Wiki articles for both of them - and I run the Texas Mini owners club.)

I don't think there is a special name for the center speedo - all of the books and manuals talk about "the centrally mounted speedometer".

The original Mini was built on a production line where they needed to turn the car upside down easily in order to install stuff inside. They built a machine called "the rotissary" which consisted of a long steel bar that went in through the boot (trunk) of the car - through a circular hole in the back seat metalwork - and then through a hole in the center of the dashboard. The car was bolted to that bar and (because it balanced nicely on it) could be spun around with almost no effort. Here is a photo of the hole in the back seat metalwork and here is the center speedo (this is what my Mini looked like BEFORE I restored it). When all of that contraption was removed, they put a circluar plate over the hole in the metal behind the back seat - and hid it with the seat cushion - and filled the big circular hole in the dash with the speedometer. It is often (including by BMW for the new MINI) said that this was done for rally driving so that the navigator could see the speedo - but that's an urban legend. There are three reasons we know this isn't true:

The 1959 Mini was never intended to be a rally car in the first place - it was a mild-mannered, super-cheap and horribly under-powered family car. Sir Alec Issigonis (who designed the Mini) didn't approve of using production cars for motor sports - he would never have agreed to compromise the design in any way to support rally drivers.
But in any case, rallying came 2 years after the original production of the car - long after the decision to put the speedo in the middle.
Nobody is going to use the original equipment speedometer in rally driving - it's all about precision and razor-edge timing. They used custom equipment for that - often with the speedo driven from a cable attached directly to the wheel hubs instead of a take-off from the transmission as with the stock Mini.

Later models of the classic Mini moved the speedometer into a more conventional position behind the steering wheel - even while rallying was important to the marketting of the car and finally getting some support from British Leyland.

The modern MINI carries on the tradition because its styling is an attempt to echo the classic Mini (it is a 'retro' design after all). However, it does simplify the business of making left and right hand drive models for various markets around the world. Also, in the 2001 to 2006 models, if you choose to buy the navigation system, it goes where the speedo would be and the speedo is moved next to the tachometer behind the steering wheel.

I like the center speedo - it's large and easy to see - and the steering wheel never blocks your view of it. Sadly, it also affords my wife a good view of it so she can nag me when I'm 5mph over the limit... :-(

SteveBaker 01:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, once again..amazing. Thanks. Acceptable 01:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Winnie the Pooh

How did the New York Public library acquire Pooh bear and the other animals? 65.219.81.138 18:37, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a short account of their travels here. SaundersW 19:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unanimously satisfied to stay on American soil? What actually happened?

spending my available balance

if I spend exactly my available balance is it ever possible to be overdrawn? I'm having trouble understanding this article Unavailable_funds_fee

The available balance can change very quickly. If you are in the bank, making the withdrawal of all of your available funds, there might be a bank charge applied the following minute. You'd be overdrawn then. The reverse can happen the following minute, when held funds are released and, lo and behiold, you have more available funds. If there are no holds on any funds in your account, if the date is mid-month when there are unlikely bank charges scheduled to be applied, and there are no automatic payments due or cheques written against the account but not yet cashed (drawn), then, you might be able to withdraw all of your available funds and not risk being overdrawn. And the bank is making money on each aspect, as the title Unavailable_funds_fee tells you. Bielle 20:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your available balance also may not reflect the actual balance of your account either. I've had situations where charges will get backed up and then applied inopportunely or have been applied in the bank's central computer but hasn't filtered out to the bank website or ATM (often for electronic transactions getting delayed over a week). And banking fees can be applied on cycles other than the calendar month (for example, my bank will apply the "alien" ATM service fee on the statement cycle, which has a cycle related to the day I opened the account). If you're absolutely sure of all of the transactions that Bielle discusses, then I suppose you could go ahead and spend down your account. But after getting burned a few times myself, I'd do that with a little trepidation (and of course, getting hit with the insufficient/unavailable funds fee is a bit on the expensive side!). –Pakman044 22:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you can get free overdraft protection, it helps in situations like this. I remember this one time, I literally overdrew 4 cents and had to pay the bank fee of like $20-$25. Just don't have it there to use as a credit card, since credit card interests are evil, but it's awesome for when you're wondering if you have enough, and avoids overdrawing by 4 cents. But if you don't, I'd try to avoid getting near the overdraw limit because from experience, some vendors will not post it for a week, and you forget about it and think you have more money than you really do. Those are what used to get me. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 01:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honorary degrees and licensed professions

How does an honorary degree differ from the corresponding earned degree for purposes of entering licensed professions in Canada? Neon Merlin 20:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC) I'll tack on to that, how does it work in the USA?[reply]

This is a legal question pertaining to licensed professions. Please see the Guidelines at the top of this page. Bielle 20:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't answer you question explicitly , but see Honorary degree#Practical use for how honorary degrees aren't much practical use in most cases. Rockpocket 22:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

C'mon, Bielle, this hardly qualifies as "legal advice". Besides are you qualified to advise as to whether this constitutes legal advice? I think only a legal professional can do that. :-) --Nricardo 00:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

C'mon Nricardo, are you qualified to advise as to whether this "hardly qualifies as legal advice"? Perhaps only a legal professional can do that, too. :-) Bielle 03:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok - I am a qualified legal professional - retired - so I think it safe to say that an honorary degree is exactly that - honorary - with the effect that unless I am already qualified to engage legally in a particular related profession to the class of honorary degree being conferred, such as a Bachelor of Laws being honorarily created a Doctor of Laws, then I am not qualified to engage legally in that latter profession. And I am not currently aware of any Profession, be it Medicine, Dentistry, Law, Religious Ministry, or similar, that will admit a practitioner, irrespective of how highly qualified they may be academically, without also being licensed to practise by a Government Regulatory or Professional Body.