Miscellaneous desk
< August 28	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 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.

August 29

Races

It is said of the rat race that even if you win, you're still a rat. Does the human race have the same problem? Neon Merlin 02:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. Rat race describes a competition that can be won. Human race describes a species, not a competition that can be won. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:27, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It does? "A rat race is a term used for an endless, self-defeating or pointless pursuit." -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 19:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who says being a rat is a problem? Rats seem quite happy being rats. --Tango (talk) 02:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How can you tell they're happy? Neon Merlin 02:42, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They seem pretty playful (pet ones, anyway). Playful would suggest happy, to me. --Tango (talk) 03:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where is Stu when we need him? --LarryMac | Talk 16:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conception dreams

Hi, conception dreams are dreams that foretell a baby's birth (or so they say). The belief is found in Korea, that's for sure, but are there any other cultures where people have such dreams? Thanks. --Kjoonlee 07:47, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, our (terribly sparse) article says, "The belief that a dream will foretell a baby's birth originates from China, and is found in some East Asian countries." So, yeah, apparently so. Seems that the Australian Aborigines also had some pretty similar beliefs, and I wouldn't be surprised to hear of others. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 08:24, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, yeah, I wanted to ask about cultures besides Asian ones. Thanks. :) --Kjoonlee 09:12, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

African Americans believe that when someone in the family has a dream with a fish in it, a baby's coming. I believe there's an example of this in the film Soul Food. Also, I just read in a travel guide book that West Africans share the superstition.Elatanatari (talk) 03:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exercise / Drink

If you do more exercise, is it okay to drink more? After a day of hard physical work there is often the temptation to go drinking rather than a day of easy non-physical work. Does the exercise counterbalance the increase in boozing? Bradley10 (talk) 12:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK, in fact advisable, to drink more water. As far as drinking more alcohol there's a lot of variables. If you had partially dehydrated during the exercise due to not drinking enough water, then it would actually be worse to overindulge than usual. On the other hand, if you were concerned about consuming excess calories through the alcoholic beverage, then the energy consumed during the exercise would help to compensate. The general medical consensus is to limit alcohol consumption regardless. --jjron (talk) 16:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sleeping with an owl in the small of your back

I was reading a book which claimed to be factual - in it the author claimed that whilst nursing an injured little owl back to health, the owl would often scuttle into bed with her and sleep curled up in the small of her back. Is this safe? Is this advisable? If I get an owl, can I sleep with it in the small of my back? Bradley10 (talk) 12:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you're not simultaneously nursing a Northern Goshawk in your armpit. NByz (talk) 17:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can't really point to any research, but I spent several years sleeping with a cat who would curl up behind my legs (or on my hip), and I'd rarely move while she was there. (Which usually resulted in a sore back from being in her preferred position so she could sleep comfortably.) I think we're a little pre-programmed to recognize small living things in our proximity and subconsciously react to them so they don't get smooshed. Tony Fox (arf!) 18:46, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you? Of course you can; who's going to stop you? However, forcing it to sleep on your back is not a good idea as it may cause it distress, especially if it is a wild owl, but if it chooses to then I can't really see the harm. For you it would certainly be ok, but whereas a cat is relatively large and would no doubt let you know with it's claws if you were swashing it, a little owl may have difficulties alerting you, so just be extra careful. JessicaThunderbolt 19:59, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um: Owls...nocturnal. Humans...not nocturnal. I don't see how this can end well. Most likely the darned thing is going to fly around and around your bedroom all night, crapping over everything in sight - keeping you awake with "Woo Woo" noises. The best pets are the ones that are naturally gregarious - pack animals like dogs and cats. Owls are loners. Hence: Owl as a pet - Dumb, dumb, dumb. SteveBaker (talk) 02:32, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Buying synthetic diamonds and other precious stones as an individual

Hello,

I'm looking to buy a synthetic diamond or other precious stone for my wife. I have a jeweler who will sent the stone in a ring that we already have.

The problem is that as an individual, I can't find any places on the 'net that will actually sell a stone to me. I can only find companies that sell stones in bulk to other businesses. Can anyone help me find a company that will sell a synthetic diamond to an individual?

Thank you for any help,

--Grey1618 (talk) 13:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on synthetic diamonds notes several companies, one of which (LifeGem) appears to market directly to individuals. — Lomn 13:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've found lifegem before, and unfortunately do not have the requisite dead animal to turn into a stone. Though I suppose with some looking... --Grey1618 (talk) 17:46, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to the article, LifeGem will also take hair for raw material. I'll also note that eBay has a Lab-created diamond section in their "Loose Diamonds & Gemstones" category. -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 19:28, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason you're looking to buy sight unseen? If you already have a jeweler you like, why not buy the stone there? Friday (talk) 20:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the jeweler doesn't sell synthetic diamonds? --Random832 (contribs) 20:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

D.NEA Diamonds seems to have some synthetic stones available on their web site, and a waiting list in case they don't have the kind you want in stock. APL (talk) 20:43, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If your reason for going "synthetic" is blood diamonds ("conflict diamonds", etc.), it is possible to buy natural diamonds that don't fall into that category, although assessing the provenance of any given gemstone may be difficult.

Atlant (talk) 13:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As the last three paragraphs of Blood_diamond#Canadian policy say, at least some natural diamonds of Canadian origin are micro-engraved to certify their non-conflict provenance. Deor (talk) 15:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just me, or is newsmaker Sarah Palin kind of hot?

I mean, ~~she won't win any beauty pageants~~ but she has a bit of that fantasy librarian thing going for her. Has the press/blogscape made anything of her hotness or lack thereof? Please provide links.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 18:25, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sticking to encyclopedic information, the article you linked indicates that she had success in various beauty pageants. -- Coneslayer (talk) 18:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hilarious, and I stand corrected. I should have read her article first!--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 18:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think she's kind of hot as well. 92.80.30.42 (talk) 20:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First thing I thought when I saw her was Vanessa Kensington from the original Austin Powers. Not in the end part, but in the beginning when she was all nerdy. If I remember correctly, there was one part where she wears her hair up just like Palin. Paragon ¹²³²¹ 20:29, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I find her just as creepy as McCain. She really looks like Rita Skeeter [1] doesn't she. This conversation isn’t very Reference Desk-ish though is it? --S.dedalus (talk) 20:31, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it pretty standard stuff for the RefDesk recently... --Tango (talk) 20:36, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, certainly for the Miscellanies desk. :-P --S.dedalus (talk) 20:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite common for US politicians to be good looking, presumably because the American people vote by looks rather than policies... --Tango (talk) 20:36, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone's observation that McCain;s VP pick seems, to them, kinda hot is as relevant to the purposes of the Ref Desk as the observation that anagrams of "Sarah Palin" include "Ah, a plan, sir!! " and "A Sharp Nail." Edison2 (talk) 20:48, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In defense of the Fat Man (a self proclaimed "Reference Desk regular"), I was merely asking if the "press and blogscape" have started to buzz about her good looks and requested links to back up such an assertion. I was not asking if you personally agree with me on whether she's hot.

Besides, if you think this question is pointless, you should see my last one. It generated a lot of enjoyable responses though. Please don't banish me from the Reference Desk.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 21:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perish the thought, al-sameen alladhi la abadan 'aada. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Google Trends says it all: "Hotness: Volcanic". Paragon ¹²³²¹ 21:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was an editorial cartoon in ~~1894~~1984 which showed Democratic nominee Walter Mondale sitting in a sportscar labeled "Ferraro" (like Ferrari)after his VP pick Geraldine Ferraro, saying "Now I can pick up some chicks!" Didn't work for him. Paris Hilton and Britney Spears might have been the first and second choices, but alas, too young. (edited to correct lysdexia) Edison2 (talk) 22:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They would have been very, very young in 1894, and was the Ferrari horse driven? Sorry -- Mad031683 (talk) 23:14, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't personally find her hot (but then, I wouldn't, would I) - however anyone who names their kids Track, Trig, Bristol, Willow and Piper has got to have something going for them. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We really don't know that much about her yet:

Hot.
Will attract those females who have forgotten the meaning of the word "sexism" to the "old white guy" ticket.
Thinks that polar bears aren't endangered and that the artic ice isn't disappearing.
Will give Obama supporters a great answer for the "Inexperienced" question.
Promotes teaching of creationism in schools.
Her or her immediate confidants are very likely not beneath POV-pushing on Wikipedia (Note number of positive edits to her biographical article by "LittleTrig" (Trig is the name of her youngest son) in the 12 hours PRECEEDING her nomination as VP).
Anti gay-marriage, pro gay rights otherwise.
Anti-abortion.

If I were an American with a vote: Generally it doesn't matter a damn who the VP is - they are almost powerless in office. But in this case I'd be very concerned that such inexperience is being added to the McCain ticket given that at his advanced age, he's quite likely to die in office - and that her views have been selected to 'balance' his...which means if she takes office - you get the opposite of what you voted for.

SteveBaker (talk) 01:36, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More like forced to act as "pro gay rights"! Read here on the page where Palin's noted as having "complied" (= caved in, to a state Supreme Court order!) because legal options to avoid doing so had been exhausted." -- Deborahjay (talk) 06:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deborahjay, as a grammar-nazi, I must rule your comments invalid (except the parts where you're right) on the grounds that you wrote that "her is very likely" rather than that "she is very likely". "She or her immediate confidants are very likely" would have scored you more points. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Hardy, as an attribution-nazy, I must rule your comments invalid (even the parts where you're right) on the ground that Deborahjay didn't write them (I did). SteveBaker (talk) 02:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I require that politicians do the right thing...I don't give a damn whether they personally like doing it. Having some flexibility in the event you're wrong is a good thing. I recall Margret Thatcher's years in office in the UK. She was absolutely famous (or is that "infamous") for not changing her mind about anything. One time she was giving a speech about some list of good works she was claiming to have done and she said that she'd set in motion some program or other which her government was funding to the tune of 30 million pounds. An aid whispers in her ear that she'd misspoken and it was really only 3 million pounds - she immediately turns around and says "Well, it SHOULD be 30 million - I'm going to make it 30 million." ...spending 27 million pounds of taxpayer's money just because she misspoke and didn't want to admit it. A little flexibility is a good thing. SteveBaker (talk) 07:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So here it appears we have a high executive officeholder whose support for or opposition to policies according to what she (not necessarily you) considers "the right thing"—in line with the requirements of her Republican constituents and supporters—evokes the intervention of knowledgeable (albeit interested) watchdog bodies and a strong judiciary enforcing rights she would, given her way, trample. As we learned in high school civics, this is the role of the "checks-and-balances" safeguards of the U.S. political system and its Constitution, arguably preferable to that of my adopted home overseas. How much better it would be to have wise, fair, and humanistic leadership (everywhere).-- Deborahjay (talk) 08:31, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The creation of the American Republic is sometimes called The Great Experiment, on which we don't seem to have an article. It doesn't mean what most people think. It's not democracy, or representative government, or even a written constitution. What it was was the disavowal of the notion that good government was the product of the personal virtue of those who govern.

The founders for the most part had a pessimistic view of human nature, and did not spare rulers from it. Nor, I think, were they particularly favorable to the notion that the state is somehow the arm of God. They expected both the populace and its representatives to be heirs to the Fall of Man and to behave accordingly.

The Great Experiment was to try to structure a system in which good government could happen anyway. The data are still being collected. --Trovatore (talk) 08:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's sad when the US - or any - election campaign comes down to hotness. In a perfect world, policy would surely be the main driving factor and whether a person seems sexy or otherwise would have nothing to do with it - and I'd be surprised if there's any correlation between policy and sexiness. FWIW, I'm waay to the left of the US Democrats in my politics, so the Republican Party is hardly what I would vote for (if I were in the US and about to vote). But that wouldn't stop me being more than interested if Condy Rice sidled up to me and suggested some form of foreign relations get-together, if you get my drift. As far as Palin's concerned, she's not my type (at least, oif pictures i've seen of her are anything to go by), but her policies - though not my type either - should appeal to a large-ish sector of Republicans. It'll be interesting to see how her activities with the Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission are viewed by her party, though. Grutness...wha? 08:48, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Instead of hotness, we should be concentrating on important issues, like the height of the candidates. Does anybody know who's taller? Sen. Obama or Sen. McCain? Obama looks taller, but I don't recall ever seeing them stand next to each other, so it may just be an optical illusion with Obama being so thin and all. I would hate to vote for the wrong guy because of an optical illusion. APL (talk) 18:56, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Y'all would seem to be missing one of the key -- KEY -- reasons behind her nomination. Traditionally, the VP nod goes to someone who can balance the ticket geographically: a Northerer picks a Southerner so they don't secede again, a Senator from the Southwest might pick a running mate from the Northeast to not alienate the big-city folk, etc. Senator Obama picked a running mate nominally to balance his lack of experience in certain essential areas. Senator McCain or his handlers in the GOP have broken new ground by picking a running mate for the primary purpose of attracting and hanging on to all those Senator Clinton supporters who have already, are thinking of, or threatening to abandon their party because Ms. Clinton didn't get the nomination.

Hot or not, it's going to be a VERY interesting next few weeks in this country!

--Danh, 70.59.119.241 (talk) 19:05, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Writing a letter

I am going to e-mail the admissions office of a university im thinking about going to next year to enquire about something. How should such a letter be set out? In particular how should it start and end? --RMFan1 (talk) 22:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well it depends what you are going to inquire about. But here's a free hint: proper grammar and spelling go a long way, even on the Ref Desk, if you want to be taken seriously. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 22:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly you need to pay attention to spelling, grammar, capitalisation and punctuation and (of course) be unfailingly polite. But it's still email and it's unlikely that a casual enquiry about something would be recorded and examined when it came time to deciding admissions - so I think you could avoid the whole "Dear Sir or Madam" thing. The main thing is that they don't remember "that guy who was such a pain in the butt about asking questions last year". SteveBaker (talk) 01:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found that an email I'd sent to my Uni with a quick question (after getting accepted, before actually starting) ended up with a copy in my official file. Whether Unis commonly keep track of emails from prospective students (rather than actual ones), I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised. --Tango (talk) 04:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are some pointers in the formal letter article. If you're just asking a question, set up a free yahoo! or hotmail account and email them anonymously. JessicaThunderbolt 14:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Part of my current job is working as a university admissions officer. We don't currently keep track of enquiry e-mails from prospective students, but will be doing so as of some point next month. There's no intention to hold anything against prospective students - just to keep track of who has asked and been sent what. Remember that the vast majority of universities will be keen to help, as they want you to apply, provided you are on track for the right kind of results, and provided you're polite and clear, nobody's likely to worry how you set out your e-mail.

The one exception could be if you are applying for something extremely competitive (such as medicine, or something at one of the very top universities). When there's that much competition, anything could be taken in to account when deciding who to give an offer to. It shouldn't be an e-mail enquiry, but some academics have odd ideas as to what counts. Warofdreams talk 03:03, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

zoom airlines

I saw the news about zoom airlines going bankrupt and leaving people stranded in America. Obviously some people would have booked through a travel agent or paid via a credit card and therefore be guarenteed a flight back without losing money, then there would also be some people who have the money available to buy another ticket back, but what happens to any people that have no money? Obviously they are not allowed to work to gain funds to buy a ticket if on a tourist visa. Would they be given a free flight back, or be deported, or allowed to stay untill they overstayed their visa then deported, or just allowed to stay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.103.46 (talk) 22:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe there are frequently agreements between airlines that they'll offer spare seats on flights to people who are stuck when an airline goes under. If all else fails, many countries have embassies who can help out people who are in such trouble. Typically, they'll fly you home and bill you for the cost of the ticket when you get home. But different countries may offer different amounts of assistance. In the USA, you can't legally work on a visitor visa - so you can't earn money (legally) while you're here. I guess if you overstayed your visa, you'd be slung in jail for a while and then eventually repatriated at US government expense...but I don't think you'd like the "eventually" part. SteveBaker (talk) 01:08, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How long is deportation likely to take if you don't fight it? Would they imprison you simply as punishment? --Tango (talk) 18:44, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of ways of getting money if you are abroad. If you have a credit card you can pay for a ticket with it and worry about paying it back when you get home. You can have your bank wire you money; you can have a friend or relative wire you money. The number of people for whom none of these work is going to be exceptionally small. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:27, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]