Miscellaneous desk
< February 13	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 15-20 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

February 14

Released balloons

What ever happens to the helium filled balloons that are released into the sky? --The Dark Side 00:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The baloons leak, however slowly they do leak, and eventually fall back to earth, deflated. -- feb^talk 00:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You mean they don't congregate in great flocks to mate? The different colored couples don't give birth to plaid balloonlets? Next, you'll tell me there's no Santa Claus! Clarityfiend 01:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some people do "balloon races" to raise money. People pay to buy one or more balloons. All the helium balloons get released. Each has a tag on it with a return address, and somewhere for the people that find it to fill in whereabouts they live. The tag that gets returned from the furthest away wins a prize. We did one at school in Kingston upon Hull, UK - the furthest balloon made it to the Loire Valley in France - a fair distance for a little balloon!

One of my schools did this when I was very little, around 5 or 6... don't remember ever getting a reply. I also bought a pack of baloons and filled them up for like 10$ at a gift shop in a mall a few years back, and let them all go, although I don't think I tied any return cards to them -- feb^talk 23:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But if they didn't leak...

If they don't leak, they get high enough in the atmosphere that they burst under their own internal pressure. The ones that deflate end up wherever they fall, probably over the ocean, and some of them make it into the digestive tracts of marine life. Leatherback turtles get around, so who knows the maximum range? Anyways, balloon releases can be considered a bad thing. Lowerarchy 14:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the balloon doesn't leak or pop, it will rise to an altitude at which its density is equal to that of the surrounding atmosphere (which decreases with increasing altitude). At that point, it will not be more buoyant than the surrounding air, so it will stop rising. If it never leaks or pops, it will float around up there forever. --TotoBaggins 15:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. As the balloon rises the pressure on the inside doesn't change - but the pressure on the outside drops - so the difference between inside and out gets bigger and bigger until either it bursts - or the density of the outside air at altitude gets to be the same as the density of the higher pressure helium. If that happens, the balloon stops going up and just bobs around. However, helium gas has very, very tiny atoms - only hydrogen has smaller atoms - and hydrogen atoms go around in pairs where helium atoms are entirely separate. These teeny-tiny separate atoms are much more easily able to escape out of the balloon than (say) oxygen or nitrogen in an air filled balloon - so helium balloons tend to lose gas fairly quickly - much more so when the outside air pressure is so low. So even if it doesn't burst, the helium is certain to leak out reasonably fast. When I was a kid, it was common to release balloons with a note attached asking people to post the tag back to the person who released it if the balloon was found. These balloons would be found thousands of miles away - so that suggests that helium balloons don't pop at altitude. Of course it would help greatly if you only put just enough helium into the balloon to get it just a tiny bit lighter than air - if you put too much helium in, it's more likely to burst at altitude. SteveBaker 03:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The pressure inside a balloon is not constant. It will change to match the outside pressure (disallowing for the force exerted by the stretched-out balloon). At constant temperature, the volume of the balloon cannot change without the internal pressure changing, according to Boyle's Law. I'm also not sure the permeability of a balloon has to do with monatomic vs. diatomic gases or with atomic radius. anonymous6494 06:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm - good point - I hadn't considered the drop in temperature with altitude. That acts to reduce the internal pressure on the balloon which may account for why it doesn't burst. I was thinking in terms of metallized mylar balloons where the volume is probably pretty constant with pressure (once it's fully inflated) - life would certainly be different with rubber balloons. It's a complicated question - but the result is the same - either the balloon bursts or it reaches equilibrium at some altitude. Because (as I said before) balloon races have been very popular in the past - with balloons going hundreds to thousands of miles - I strongly suspect they reach equilibrium. As for the permeability of balloons - you can do the experiment - it's REALLY clear that helium balloons deflate much faster than those filled with air. SteveBaker 17:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll agree with you that helium balloons deflate much faster than air-filled balloons. But is the difference due to atomic radius? Is permeability mainly dependent on atomic radius? Does it have to do with monatomic vs. diatomic gases? anonymous6494 17:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

none the less we (whoever lets the baloons out) are littering all over the world.

Tiger I vs. Tiger II

Which variant of the World War Two German Tiger tank is more well-known, famous and has more historical significant- the Tiger I or the Tiger II? Thanks. Jamesino 02:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that Tiger I was more significant, based on the number of production and the mention of it in more websites. --[|.K.Z|][|.Z.K|] 09:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More famous too. That's the one you (supposedly) see in movies that make an attempt to be accurate. Has there ever been a war film with a Tiger II lookalike? Clarityfiend 15:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Riddle

I saw this riddle and have been stumped:

What do the following words have in common -- David, Mark, Robert, Jasper, Georgia, Roy, Man, Andy and Jackson?

They're all names of people? All men except for Georgia. --⁪froth^T 03:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, true, but I think it's something more specific than that -- don't you?

They are all combinations of vowels and consonants. --ChesterMarcol 04:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... which is true of the vast majority of English words. JackofOz 05:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... but not everyone is an American artist of the 20th century: Mark Rothko, Robert Rauschenberg, Jasper Johns, Georgia O'Keeffe, Roy Lichtenstein, Man Ray, Andy Warhol, and Jackson Pollock. ---Sluzzelin 05:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you got that without googling, I'd be very impressed. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 06:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not that impressive really, when you happen to like most of the artists listed there. The clue was "Roy, Man" - it was early in the morning and I read "Ray, Man". So my bad eyesight helped me stumble on the right association from the get-go. ---Sluzzelin 07:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about David? I'm sure there must be plenty of American artists called David, but none come to mind that are as famous as the names listed. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 10:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, good catch. My guess is David Smith. ---Sluzzelin 10:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Painter-ish American residents not Born in the USA + Pop leaning of list might suggest David Hockney... --Shirt58 10:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact they were all born in the USA except Rothko. And Hockney is usually considered a British artist. So I don't think it's him. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 08:21, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. Nevertheless, possible riddle answer: "Mostly American (meaning US born, though some born in Europe or with immediate European family heritage, or otherwise; long-term USA resident), mostly male visual artists of the middle and late C20 who are mostly considered Pop artists, + an earlier photography pioneer Dadaist (that precursor to Pop) + a nevertheless very American Abstract Expressionist (that wild child of Man Ray's Zurich Dada)". (Yeah, right shirt-stoopid. This is about as inelegant as your underpants collection.) Shirt58 15:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are US Subs painted orange on the bottom?

This is a question that has been bugging me for some time. Why do some modern US submarines painted half red/orange (Examples: 1, 2, 3). If anyone can help, that would be great. --Gunny01 06:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd assume it's like the water line on boats for when the submarine isn't fully submerged, but I'm unsure. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 06:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd guess that this is exactly the same reason that sharks have a light belly and dark top, when looking down onto the submarine's dark top against the dark sea below, the submarine is camoflauged. in a similar way, when looking up at a submarine against the bright sky, the orange camoflauges the submarine too. Hope this helps! (I'm fairly certain about the dark top reason I give here, but not so certain about the orange bottom reason, when would anyone every bee looking up at a submarine? It's useful for a shark but probably much less useful for a sub. Time for research!) 213.48.15.234 13:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wirbel is correct, it's the waterline when the sub is surfaced. Note this frigate with the same paint style. Note also that your photo #2 is not the same as this paint scheme but rather a trick of the light and water -- there's simply no way to see the underside of Chicago from that angle.

It is not, however, any form of camo. Unlike aircraft, no one looks for subs from the underside, and subs operating near the surface are far more likely to be spotted by their periscopes or any residual wake reaching the surface proper. — Lomn 13:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So we know it's orange at or below the waterline, but why? Why paint it differently than above the water? Perhaps it's rust (though I hope not)... anonymous6494 06:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on: remember it's a submarine, the whole thing spends time under water. So it doesn't make sense that it's a waterline as such. Gunny01 11:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

army jacket

i am after a US army jacket with a yellow logo on the side with a black dog head on, does any1 know where you can get these and who wears them because i really urgently need 1!!! thx :)

File:1CD SSI.gif

Are you sure it's not this image, which sounds similar? 1st Cavalry Division patch. Shimgray | talk | 13:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yep thats the 1! i remember my cousin wearing some uniform with that on when i was really young and have been wondering what it was since then.

Your best bet is to go to eBay and buy the jacket and patches separately and then have them sown on by a professional tailor or seamstress. You may also buy them at an army surplus stores. (may need an article)

Created redirect article at that location. --Maelwys 16:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

paint

how to stop the new paint smell and burning of eyes?

Peel an onion, preferably a large one - and slice it thickly into 4-5 pieces. Lay these pieces on dishes placed around the affected room/area - and I guarantee the smell and fumes will be absorbed by the onion within a day. Simply discard the onion afterwards. And next time, do the onion thing before you begin painting. It works - promise.

Origami

I saw [1] on BBC news, anyone have a link on how to make one of these, or how it was made? 213.48.15.234 12:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Our Origami article has several links. A Google search doesn't seem to help for this specific one however. --hydnjo talk 13:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would this be worthy of an article? It seems to be a little piece of history as the first valentines gift from royal mail 213.48.15.234 13:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Australia Income Tax and Statute of Limitation

Does anyone know what and if there is a statute of limitation for paying income tax in Australia, or if it is different for states, QLD. Say I left Australia without having done a few years of tax returns and oweing them money. How many years would it be safe for me to return without getting arrested? --195.157.84.178 14:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naive or what ? Imagine a Government allowing non-payment of taxes! Death and taxes cannot be avoided.86.219.38.115 16:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)doughnut[reply]

The statute of limitations is in keeping records of submitted income information, that I believe is seven years, don't take my word for it, I'm NOT an accountant, but I believe if they don't audit your return after seven years you are no longer required to hold evidence of what you claimed.. IF you owe them money, they won't just let you off the hook because you've got away with it for seven years. How long were they chasing Christopher Skase? Vespine 21:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help/Clarificaton

My name is Wes Mullings D.D. I have been solicited by both Metropolitan Who's Who and Cambridge Who's Who out of New York. My question is compared to Who's Who in America what is the difference in exposure or recognition. I had maintained a low profile in the years of my accomplishments for the sake of modesty and wanting to stay in the background. But now as i've grown older would like to be recognized. Part 2 question is how does one go about being posted in Who's Who in America. My email address is (personal information redacted to reduce spam per Ref Desk practice).209.247.22.26 16:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)wes mullings209.247.22.26 16:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)(Removed personal info. Edison 16:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

A google search is sometimes instructive in these matters. --Tagishsimon (talk)

That is a very common scam - beware. They exist to sell you a copy of the book - nobody but people listed in it will ever buy the thing so it's essentially worthless to be listed in it. Be very, very careful. SteveBaker 03:13, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Christian dating service, right? One time, Poetry.com told me that a poem I wrote was good enough for their publication. I didn't buy the book, seeing that there were about 10,000 poems per book, and they were putting out about two such books per month. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 04:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Age question

What exactly is the period of age called when you are between 18 and 21 years? Simply south 16:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the US, this is often called "college age" or "college years", even when referencing those who might not be attending a post-secondary school. Mishatx *разговор* 16:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Young adult?86.219.38.115 16:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)doughnut[reply]

In the UK - Driving, Voting, Smoking amd Drinking Alcohol - but not yet an adult. You go to jail in Britain between 18 and 21 and you go to a Young Offenders' Institution, and after that, an adult prison.

Really? I thought 18 was legally an adult in the UK, although a few things (like being an MP?) require you to be older. Skittle 00:51, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FAQ for keyboard shortcuts

Wouldn't it be a good idea to post a FAQ for Keyboard Shortcuts or Accessibility? I found what I needed to know (how to keyboard to the Search field) only by making my way to a technical discussion thread and then reading down the entries until I encountered one that included this information. Apparently there is a function that is well known among more expert users, but not to intermediate users like me. The discussion was pretty old (2005?) and at that time there were probably proportionately fewer intermediate users of Wikipedia. Salliesatt 18:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First line of Keyboard shortcut: For Wikipedia keyboard shortcuts, see Wikipedia:Keyboard shortcuts. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Canadian Online Pharmacy

Is it illegal to order antibiotics from an online Canadian pharmacy if I am in America and do not have a prescription? What are the legal ramifications of something like that?

Wow, this is both a legal and a medical question! We can't touch it twice as much! Go to a doctor for your infection, and see a lawyer about legalities. --Zeizmic 20:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And while you're out, kick Bush out of office. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 04:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, chances are if you can't get a prescription for antibiotics, they're not going to do you any good, they could make you ill, and you'll be increasing the chances of antibiotic-resistant bacteria developing and killing people. So please don't do it. Skittle 00:49, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian pharmacists expect you to have a prescription of some kind, generally from a Canadian doctor. That costs a lot of money, and for something as cheap as antibiotics it isn't worth it. The people who go for Canadian prescriptions are buying $300 a month or more of prescriptions every month, year after year, so a $50 charge to see a doctor and get a prescription isn't significant. Doing so for a $4 prescription of penicillin is outlandish.

Plus, not every antibiotic is useful for every infection. You'd have to know exactly what type of bacteria you're trying to kill (and of course antibiotics do nothing for viruses and can even make things worse (by killing off the virus's competition)), *and* you'd have to know what antibiotic kills that type of bacteria. Use the wrong type and, again, you're killing off the competition. --Charlene 10:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rooster's red crown

what is the rooster's red crown called? 63.215.26.146 20:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A comb. [2] Mishatx *разговор* 20:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's corresponding article is cockscomb. ---Sluzzelin 21:39, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's got to be the one variant I didn't try. I think I'll add a note at comb. Mishatx *разговор* 22:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was just as surprised when both comb and the rooster yielded nothing. Then I ran to the chicken article and found the link. I ask the native English speakers, farmers and ornithologists to weigh in here. Is cockscomb the best of all lemmas? Should it also redirect from Comb (rooster), Comb (galliformes), Comb (bird), Comb (zoology) ... ? ---Sluzzelin 22:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree - and Wikipedia is "The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit" - so you can fix it! SteveBaker 02:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Putting farmer hat on) Actually, we perfer to call 'em "the rooster's red crown." V-Man737 02:21, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do Brits still commonly refer to a rooster as a "cock?" As in "Has anyone seen my ----?" Edison 06:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, when I kept chickens, I certainly never refered to the male bird as a rooster. To me, that would feel odd. I used cock or cockerel, but I think our article says 'cockerel' only refers to young cocks. Anyway, I've never seen it as a problem. Surely you would say you get up at cockcrow rather than roostercrow? I see blue tits and great tits in the garden, and pick up titbits of knowledge without being embarassed. A cockroach doesn't make me think of sex, and nor does a peacock. I can call my cat "Hey pussy" without fear of being pointed at and laughed. This doesn't mean puns and innuendo using these words pass me by, but I can use the words in everyday conversation without worry. Skittle 02:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We farmers always know where our cocks are. V-Man737 06:13, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sandman: The Wake

Zulli, Muth, and Vess; who did which parts? I know Zulli pencilled the wake (little w) and the epilogue, but who colored? Who inked the other bits? Was Zulli the penciller for everything that needed pencil? 64.198.112.210 21:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen the article The Sandman: The Wake? It seems to have what you are after. I've only read the Gaiman/Mckean Sandmans.. Was Wake good?

Until next time, I think the question would be better posed at the Entertainment Ref desk. 惑乱分からん 01:05, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, The Wake was good. Unfortunately, the article doesn't tell me who did colors for what and suchlike, just who worked on it. I only know Zulli was the penciller for the first few. and I apologize, I had no idea there was an entertainment refdesk. 64.198.112.210 17:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and McKean just did covers... 64.198.112.210 17:13, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Immigration to Germany and the United States

I was wondering if I could have help finding immigration statistics of ethic Russians migrating to the United States and Germany from the late 1800's to the present. I have to create a graph of my results. Thank you very much!

-Heather Falenski168.103.94.46 23:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Immigration to the United States and Russian American have some info. Rmhermen 03:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

indoor garden

Suppose I want to start an indoor garden.

1. Can I grow things like strawberries, blueberries, etc, inside in a pot? To do so, can I just bury any old strawberry with seeds covering it, and it will grow? 2. Do I need to keep a special lamp shinning over it, or will an ordinary lamp work? 3. Any suggestions for what else to grow? Duomillia 23:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A quick google search brings up...http://www.webterrace.com/garden/ This might be able to help, i'm not really knowledgeable about gardening so wouldn't like to suggest anything but I do have some chives that grow happily on the window-sill, and I think many herbs can be grown with little more than water and sunlight. ny156uk 00:32, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most fruit likes being grown in a greenhouse - so if you put your pot next to a suitable window - it ought to grow OK. Dunno about planting a strawberry though - some commercial crops don't produce viable seeds. You would probably be better off trying to buy some small strawberry plants in a garden center or something. Strawberries might have another problem - their original name was 'Stray Berries' because they stick out long stems that droop to the ground and then stick out new roots at the far end...so you get a kind of chain of connected strawberry plants. If they prefer to spread that way, their seeds might well be useless for that reason also. I'm not 100% sure about that though. SteveBaker 02:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From our article Strawberry:

The name is derived from Old English strēawberiġe which is a compound of streaw meaning "straw" and berige meaning "berry". The reason for this is unclear. It may derive from the strawlike appearance of the runners, or from an obsolete denotation of straw, meaning "chaff", referring to the scattered appearance of the achenes.

Interestingly, in other Germanic countries there is a tradition of collecting wild strawberries by threading them on straws. In those countries people find straw-berry to be an easy word to learn considering their association with straws.

There is an alternative theory that the name derives from the Anglo-Saxon verb for "strew" (meaning to spread around) which was streabergen (Strea means "strew" and Bergen means "berry" or "fruit") and thence to streberie, straiberie, strauberie, straubery, strauberry, and finally, "strawberry", the word which we use today. The name might have come from the fact that the fruit and various runners appear "strewn" along the ground.

Popular etymology has it that it comes from gardeners' practice of mulching strawberries with straw to protect the fruits from rot (a pseudoetymology that can be found in non-linguistic sources such as the Old Farmer's Almanac 2005). However, there is no evidence that the Anglo-Saxons ever grew strawberries, and even less that they knew of this practice.

Interesting, because I always thought something similar to the popular etymology, because all the farmed strawberries I've seen have been grown like this. Anyway, since you can grow strawberries from seed, I would assume growing strawberries from seed is possible. But bought strawberries may, indeed, have sterile seeds. Incidentally, other creeper/tendril plants (such as Spider plants) also have flowers and seeds. The flowers/seeds allow genetic mixing when possible, while the tendrils enable clone-style reproduction to increase the chances of the population meeting another to get some genetic mixing possible. And other OR... Skittle 00:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit] History

If you are serious you should buy seeds so you know exactly what to expect before you invest your time. Incandescent light bulbs are practically useless for plant growth, you should use Compact fluorescent lamps or some other kind of flourescent lamp. The lamp should be as close to the plant as possible without burning it, to maintain high enough light levels. A small herb garden would probably be easier to maintain than fruiting plants. --Diletante 02:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I keep my garden inside of a clean apartment, will I need to worry about pests? Duomillia 02:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried starting seeds indoors in pots with a 2 tube fluorescent growlamp right above them, for later transplanting into a garden outdoors. I measured the intensity of the illumination and found that it was a tiny fraction of the intensity of bright outdoor sunlight. To provide the plants with the intensity of sunlight would apparently require a great many fluorescent bulbs in close proximity (though lord knows people have reportedly grown pot under lights). With inadequate light intensity, plants do not bear fruit and grow tall and spindly. I have had good luck with flowers such as African Violets. Window light for several hours a day might be more productive than plant lights. If you start with sterile potting soil there should be no pests. Pests which come in through, say, an open window could be dealt with by pesticides or biological control (swat 'em). Edison 06:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes our eyes are very good at hiding the huge difference of intensity of between sunlight and artificial light. The inverse square law governs how much light energy lands on an object, so if a leaf is twice as far from a light source it will only recieve 1/4 the energy. So low intensity fourescents must be kept within mere inches of foliage to be useful. A 40watt CFL should be able to cover a bit less than a square foot provided you keep your plants very small (thorugh pruning or training) and keep them very close to the lamp. Note that 40W cfls are advertised as 100W or 125W watts because they are supposed equivelant to that wattage of an incandescent. Making fruit takes alot of energy so that might not be practicle without more light. You can start to approach sunlight levels by using sodium vapor lamps and metal halide lamps which are much more effecient than fluorescents (and are also available in wattages as small as 50W). Since we are talking about such a small garden pests shouldn't be much of a worry. It would be easy to apply a treatment like anti-pest soaps to the entire garden if needed. Diletante 19:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2007 February 14