Miscellaneous desk
< June 22	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 24 >

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.

June 23

Question about Teeth

I have a some questions about teeth. Does straight teeth give you any advantages? Does having white teeth give any advantages?Cardinal Raven (talk) 03:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Straight, white teeth are generally associated with youth and good health. So, if there are any advantages being thought youthful and healthy, white, straight teeth would be useful in accruing them. ៛ Bielle (talk) 03:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From my experience, straight teeth are lot more important than you would think in language acquisition (usually SLA, but often even FLA). More frontal fricative sounds like "sh", "f", "th", and "j" (to a certain degree "l" and "r" too) all rely on the teeth in some way to create sound (often as the final barrier to the air flowing through your mouth, above your tongue), and straight teeth rarely cause any problems there. The more misaligned the childrens teeth are, there seems to be a higher likelihood that the child will use an alternate mouth alignment to produce the same sound. E.g., typically "sh" is produced by coaxing the air along the tongue across the alveolar ridge, and then toward the ridge of the teeth. When the teeth are noticeably misaligned, it seems that some children are forced to correct their aim, and will produce different (but similar) sounds to approximate the "sh". The same applies for other sounds.

Especially with second language acquisition, students with straighter teeth often seem to have more confidence producing sounds that don't exist in their mother tongue. My assumption is that people naturally avoid touching their teeth with their tongue, except when necessary, and children with misaligned teeth tend to loop into much more constrictive avoidance patterns because there are a lot more shapes inside the mouth getting in the way, and there is often also a greater risk of damage to the tongue. Students with straight teeth seem to have less reluctance to stick out their tongues, and thus with greater freedom of movement with their tongues, they may manage to master certain new sounds easier than those with misaligned teeth. I don't think it's a coincidence that all of my long-term 1 on 1 accent training sessions (this is all informal) have been with students with relatively or badly misaligned teeth. It is often clear that they also have problems (though they've found way around them) pronouncing certain sounds properly in their own language. 210.254.117.186 (talk) 04:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I disagree with the opinion that straight teeth are associated with youth. Maybe on TV they are, but especially more recently, it is the youth that struggle with misaligned teeth, and they are often corrected by the time they become adults. 210.254.117.186 (talk) 04:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by the rest of your response, I'm guessing that SLA and FLA stand for Second & First Language Acquisition? Dismas|^(talk) 04:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've linked the now. 210.254.117.186 (talk) 07:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And let's not forget about the social advantages of straight, white teeth. In addition to helping with dating, they may also help you get a better job and advance faster in that job. StuRat (talk) 12:16, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Although you can't tell from our picture of him) Steve Buscemi might disagree about straight teeth versus job prospects, although I'm sure what you said is generally true.

Atlant (talk) 12:23, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but then you end up being fed into a wood chipper. StuRat (talk) 06:38, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or beaten up waiting for le Métro. Mon Dieu!

Atlant (talk) 14:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can tell the importance of teeth varies a lot by country. In Europe, esp. Britain, the lack of straight teeth seems to be only a minor issue, whereas in the U.S. it is very common to shell out thousands of dollars to straighten teeth because it is seen as something of major import. (So says someone who had extensive oral surgery and rehabilitation for his not-very-crooked teeth as a child. But since said someone lives in the U.S., he feels this is perfectly normal. ;-) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having naturally very white teeth could actually be a disadvantage as I've heard that slightly yellow teeth are stronger than white teeth. Of course this could be an urban myth so I stand to be corrected but a google provides a few links. I emphasise this refers to natural colour, not discolouration due to staining, disease, thinning enamel etc. Mike 87.113.67.104 (talk) 21:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Using flouride yellows teeth slightly, but I think its advantages outweigh this. In the UK you now see children with braces, when you didnt decades ago. Rather a shame really - I do not care for cheesy Mickey Mouse style artificial grins. 80.2.201.59 (talk) 23:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Staring through a pinhole

I am slightly nearsighted and occasionally wear glasses. I noticed that if I poke a very small hole with a pin in a piece of paper and hold it right up against my eye and look through it, everything becomes in focus. As the hole is small, this is not viable for looking at dark objects, however, when watching TV through this tiny hole, everything in the TV becomes in focus, just like as if I am wearing my glasses. Why does this phenomenon happen? Thanks. Acceptable (talk) 05:01, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See depth of field. Basically you are constructing a pin-hole aperture, which increases the depth of field in your vision, making out of focus images clearer. Squinting your eye works in the same principle is well. --antilived^{T | C | G} 05:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also perhaps of interest is Camera obscura (think that's the spelling) - essentially that same thing can be used in a very-dark room and it will project the image on to the wall (think it does it back-to-front and upside-down if my memory of seeing it on tv is correct). Very interseting stuff. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 08:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are also (surprisingly expensive)spectacles available which use this principle to amazing effect, however focussing is achieved at the cost of narrowing of the vision field. You might like to make a pair, check this link for details. [1] Richard Avery (talk) 09:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Username

I'd like to change my username. Is that possible?? Also, is it possible to change my username without changing the location of my userpage?? Will my current page be deleted if I change my name?? Aanusha Ghosh (talk) 11:16, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:USERNAME#Changing_your_username and WP:RENAME — Matt Eason ^{(Talk  Contribs)} 11:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Friends without money

What should I do about friends without money?

Let them some money knowing that perhaps it will take ages for them to pay back?
Invite them to go out and pay the bill?
Let them and move on?
Help them get a new job?

GoingOnTracks (talk) 15:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translation for Americans: "Let them" = "Lend them some money". StuRat (talk) 18:15, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the first thing you need to ask is why don't they have any money. If their house has just burned down and they have lost their job, then I'd say help them - at least in the short term. If they've gambled it away on drink or the horses, then friendly advice and support is what I would give them, but don't get into the situation where they become entirely dependent on you and almost expect you to give them money whenever they turn up on your doorstep. JessicaN10248 15:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since they are your friends I suppose that you will be able to talk about any problem that they may have. I suppose that you should help them in any emergency (or most of them). On the other hand if it just happens that they have less money than you (but are in a stable and happy position), you should remember that you don't have to do everything together. Try to find some activities that you all can share without putting strains on their budget. And don't mind having fun with other people in more expensive entertainment. 80.58.205.37 (talk) 16:05, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help them get a new job. this will benefit everyone involved and will improve your friendship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 16:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you do things which are free, so your friend doesn't feel obligated to spend money. StuRat (talk) 18:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And, if you do lend money, do it formally, with a written contract that makes it clear this is a loan, not a gift, and a schedule for when it will be repaid. StuRat (talk) 18:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The simplest such written contract for them to execute is a post-dated check. --Sean 19:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a software guy who has always dated artsy women, so this means I've generally made 2-5 times my various girlfriends' annual salary. My informal policy has always been that if I make X% of our totalled incomes, I pay the bill X% of the time. If not being able to go out to nice enough places with your friends has been cramping your style, you could try doing that without feeling resentful that it's unfair to you. --Sean 19:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about the obvious ... don't be concerned with their financial affairs ... and let that be their concern ...? You risk many problems when you try to "solve other people's problems" ... among them: becoming enabling, becoming codependent, becoming controlling, setting up "expectations", and engaging in the "martyr syndrome" (you try to solve everyone else's problems as a defense mechanism when you feel helpless to solve your own). There are many truisms to consider ... and they are time-tested truisms that have endured for good reason. Namely:

Neither a borrower nor a lender be.
A fool and his money are soon parted.
Never lend money to friends or family.
God helps those who help themselves.

Watch any episode of "Judge Judy" to see what often happens when you lend money to friends. If money is truly burning a hole in your pocket, donate some to the American Cancer Society or the Humane Society or your church, etc. A much better cause than financing your friends' ability to socialize. That is my arm chair psychology and my two cents on the issue. Best of luck. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:25, 23 June 2008 (UTC))[reply]

<sarcasm>Yeah, if I had to choose one of the following:

help out friends in need by helping them find a job, or
the obvious: ignore friends when they become poor and sit blissfully in front of the telly to a brand new episode of Judge Judy under the comforting "knowledge" that this is the way God wants it (while using any excess cash to fund the pastor's new holiday house),

I'd definitely choose the Judge.</sarcasm> Zain Ebrahim (talk) 19:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your sarcasm is quite warranted. The American Cancer Society and the Humane Society are pretty much scams, right? Much better to throw one's money away at shiftless, lazy friends who won't (not, can't) work ... or who won't (not, can't) pay their own way. Yes, their social pursuits are a little more important than cancer and other activist causes. Not sure how I missed that. And let's get over the melodramatics and theatrics. I highly doubt that all of the OP's clique of friends were all simultaneously financially wiped out by some dire emergency. The OP is referring pretty much to all of his/her circle of friends. And if a dire emergency were truly a part of this picture: (a) the OP would not be asking whether or not to help; and/or (b) the OP would have made such a relevent point clear in the question. Your sarcasm misses the point of my reply. The OP needs to handle his/her own finaces and let his/her friends handle theirs. There is no dire emergency here. Just a bunch of friends who cannot afford to socialize ... and one who can. Cut the theatrics. The fact the the OP (a) is worried about his/her friends' finances and (b) is worried about lending them money and (c) is worried about helping them find a job ... sounds like the OP is a rather enabling person with some martyr complex. And, again, the OP is not referring to one single friend who has undergone financial emergency ... the OP is referring to all of his/her friends. Hence, the obvious in my original reply still stands. Best of luck. Don't enable the bums. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC))[reply]

And it would be quite the coincidence if all of the OP's friends have undergone some severe financial hardship that is swathing across the OP's nation ... and yet the OP is the only one unscathed ...? Come now ... (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:03, 24 June 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Of course the exact circumstances make a difference. If he is talking about normally wealthy friends, with a regular income who have said something like "We cannot afford to go out this month because the car broke down and we had unexpected bills" then I would probably pay for them to go out with an informal "take me out when you can afford it". If they have no regular job and are unlikely to ever have money then I would probably not help. Of course if you can help someone to get a new job without cost to yourself then I would say do it, but don't vouch for someone to your employer unless you really know they are reliable. -- Q Chris (talk) 07:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I may be getting cynical, but lately I've found friends (even clients) who complain they can't afford things but they really do have money somewhere (like investments, land or something). I've been poor and I've been flush, but the people who really can't afford something don't mention it. And when you're in a common state, like being students together, that's something else. One guy asked me to help him with a bond for a place to rent. I didn't. The next thing I know, he's emailing a lecturer from Club Med somewhere. Let your instiincts (not your generous impulses) guide you. I'm all for helping people get a better job. I'm all for getting a better job myself. Best, Julia Rossi (talk) 08:18, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AGRICULTURE

SHIFTING AND AGRICULTURE PRACTICES IS SOUTH ASIA .REGIONS WHERE ARE THEY DONE.CROPS —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayush ch09 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Swidden. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to your Cap Lock?--Faizaguo (talk) 16:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

rice is one of the crops--Apollonius 1236 (talk) 22:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Musings...Why can't demons lie and why they like to color........

Every horror flick, series or reality show that I watch in which the characters use an Ouija Board to contact the spirit that is haunting a house assume that the demon they contact is telling the truth. Why? I was watching 'A Haunting' a show that my husband and I love to watch together as it is more ridiculous than scary (I know that if there was a half-buried skeleton sleeping on my basement floor that was drinking from my water hose in the middle of the night, I wouldn't stay long enough to turn off the water faucet, much less wait it out for a dispensation for an exorcisim from the Pope, but I digress). So when a family decides to get answers from the ghost that is haunting their home, they always ask; "What is your name?" The answer is 90% of the time is a common English name such as FRANK or MARY or perhaps even something more exotic like SETH. Never does the ouija board answer with a name that perhaps no-one in the house has ever encountered such as Aappikka or Auðfinnur etc, etc. Then the next question is usually "When were you born?" or "When did you die?" or "When did you live?". For example. one episode of 'A Haunting' that was on last week the ouija board replied "Never". Well the medium that was with the family explained (with much dramatic effect) that the entities response meant that it was not a ghost of a dead person in their house, that it was a DEMON!! I guess she based that on that 1 response. So I guess demons can't lie?

My husband and I also both noticed that everytime a child gets possessed by an evil demon/ghost/spirit that the child seems to always take up the pasttime of coloring. It is as if Satan himself is endorsing Crayola. So one can conclude that demonic possession leads to creativity and coloring inside the lines. Maybe the coloring takes the demon's mind off of the centuries of hate, gnashing of teeth and of course, having to tell the truth anytime anyone is equipped with an ouija board.

If anyone can shed some light on these two questions, please be so kind as to type a response. I am greatly puzzled. Thank You Darrrrksunshine —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.211.38.189 (talk) 20:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the explanation for these phenomena is that you have been watching shows made for a mass market and they are unoriginal and based on cliché. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a child doing childlike things, but in a slightly creepy way, is even more scary than if he just came right out and said "I'M THE DEVIL!" Digger3000 (talk) 22:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a notable paucity on serious (verifiable) scientific research into demons. My working hypothesis is that "good" and "evil" are absolute categories which are consistent, ie perfectly true to the concept. Like most most of my working hypotheses, this one may be, IYHO, BS.

Your question on truth is not applicable to demons as it is not applicable to angels (or to god). Ethics do not apply to such entities, as they do not apply to triangles or to gravity. Starting from St Augstine´s (Prost, FerkelP) De Civitate Dei humans have mused upon this question which easily fills an entire library. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Passport entry stamps

I'm an American citizen in Rome, Italy at the moment, having entered via a flight from Athens. At customs, there was no passport control. Is there a simple way to get an entry stamp in Rome just to have one? Thanks! --213.140.21.227 (talk) 21:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a simple one, no. That creates an issue of two EU-entry stamps without an EU-exit stamp (or an entry-exit pair leaving you without an outstanding entry), which causes problems when you eventually leave. — Lomn 21:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are in travelling in the EU, then you are, in a way, in the same country, except for the UK & Ireland. Have a peek at Schengen Agreement and Common Travel Area. Fribbler (talk) 23:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a multiple entry visa, it may be possible to get a stamp by travelling to a non-Schengen country, such as Switzerland (where the Schengen agreement is not yet fully implemented), and returning. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 15:42, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have found customs officers to be generally most helpful if you specifically ask to have your passport stamped, even in cases where the stamp isn't technically necessary. Try going to the customs office - there usually is one, even if you don't have to go through passport control. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]