Miscellaneous desk
< April 6	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 8 >

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.

April 7

Déjà vu by multiple people at the same time?

So A, B and I were in a car. As we were driving over a bridge B threw an apple core out the window into the river. I said I felt like this had happened before. We all experience Déjà vu sometimes so I'm used to it. However A and B both said that they felt like it had happened before too, that they were experiencing Déjà vu also. That's the first and only (and last) time we've everthrown anything in to that river, especially from a moving vehicle. Wtf happened?--92.251.159.250 (talk) 00:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some possibilities:

1) A coincidence. That is, you both had a similar "tossing an object" experience.

2) Person B is putting person A on. That is, it's not really a déjà vu for them.

3) The power of suggestion. Person B again didn't really have a déjà vu, but person A saying so convinced them that they did, too. This is how mass hysteria starts. StuRat (talk) 00:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

4) You really have thrown something out the window before that's triggering a common feeling. I suppose it need not have been in that specific river or from that specific vehicle. Buddy431 (talk) 00:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the article on Déjà vu says, the cause may not be a confusion with an actual memory from the past, but a glitch in our perception of the present which accidentally processes the short-term memory (of the last second or two) as if it came from long-term memory. (This doesn't address why you all had it at once, I'm just saying. And of course confusion with a real memory might add to the feeling.) 81.131.64.245 (talk) 01:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Someone is changing the Matrix! Run! Adam Bishop (talk) 04:14, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you were stuck in a repeating "time loop" like on a Star Trek Next Generation episode, where eventually each participant in a card game "knew" what cards would come up next. Edison (talk) 14:35, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lemon martini (talk) 00:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC) ;)[reply]

You're sure you'd already posted something, right?! --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 05:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

whoa! deja vu!!! http://comics.com/monty/2010-04-07/ !!!Gzuckier (talk) 06:31, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How can this car move?

http://punditkitchen.com/2009/10/21/political-pictures-attack-fail/

It seems that this car is warproof. Anyways...

Can you identify the car's model? I'm just curious.
How can this thing be moving at all? Does it run on willpower or something?

--121.54.2.188 (talk) 08:09, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know which model it is, but the image caption claims it is a Toyota. However, the badge on the car's front grille, doesn't look like the badge used on Toyotas for the last many years. As for how it can be moving at all, how do you know it was driven at all. Maybe the vehicle was towed, the photo staged, or the soldiers just came across a couple of locals sitting in a car wreck. Even so, cars can still be driven with a substantial amount of bodywork damage so long as the mechanical parts still work and the wheels turn without shredding the tyres. The car in the image looks to have been involved in a crash or maybe rolled, rather then the damage being the result of a hit by some kind of weapon. Whatever happened to it, it was an incident in which the driver was probably lucky to survive judging by the extent of the damage. Astronaut (talk) 09:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Looks like mostly body damage to me. Granted, it won't pass a US state inspection but I don't see an obvious reason why it wouldn't move under its own power. Dismas|^(talk) 09:32, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me like it was side-swiped by something big and high, like an MRAP, that tore off the side panels and roof. However, the components which make a car drivable are under the hood, on the dashboard, under the car, and the wheels, and they all look to be intact. StuRat (talk) 09:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem would be the structural integrity of the thing. Most (intentional) convertibles have extra bracing in the chassis and more welds in the bodywork than hard-tops. Without that, I'd be worried about it failinng catastrophically at speed. However, without a windshield, I doubt they'll be driving very fast! But I don't see any reason why the engine & drivetrain shouldn't work perfectly. Of course there is always the possibility that this is just a clever fake. SteveBaker (talk) 03:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot tell the exact model. But it's a Corolla van. Probably Toyota Corolla (E100), Toyota Corolla (E110) or Toyota Corolla (E120). Oda Mari (talk) 06:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i've seen videos of FWD cars which were cut in half behind the front seats and still drove around fine with their hinders scooting on the ground like an impacted dog. of course, they had to be slightly modified re fuel tanks, etc but the car in the pic looks to be in pretty good shape, third world wise. Gzuckier (talk) 06:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

looking for advice

So, I'm writing a book, as you do, and one of my characters is having some trouble concentrating on their work, motivating themselves to get homework done and so on. A friend of theirs offers a lot of advice that helps, but i have little idea what that advice should be, so far I have only the suggestion to eat breakfast every day and get regular exercise. I would like for the advice they are given to be real, enough that people reading the book could follow it themselves.

Later they arrange a system where, on the first day they go for a short walk, then gradually longer walks, before starting jogging, gradually building up toward more difficult exersizes later. But it seems, not being a particularly physically active person myself, I have little idea what they could be doing after that. Preferably it should be things to help them become more healthy, rather than practicing and gaining skill in a particular sport. So, any ideas?

80.47.88.128 (talk) 10:18, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the exercise régime, perhaps they could come across a copy of the RCAF 5BX exercise programme. Our article has a link to the programme, with descriptions of the exercises involved. DuncanHill (talk) 10:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As for motivation, how about a series of small rewards ? Like, when they get their homework done, they get to eat a cookie ? StuRat (talk) 11:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know this will not look like the most helpful response, but for the exercise bit, why not give it a shot yourself before writing it? The best authors write what they know, and learn what they don't know but want to write about. Rather than writing something about how easy it is to scale up an exercise regimen from nothing, why not give it a shot yourself first? It'll give you deeper insights into how it works and how your characters would view the situation. It'll produce more realistic writing and more realistic characters, especially if you are hoping your readers will be able to actually get something out of reading it. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Port on BMW bumper

What is this little port on the rear bumper of some BMWs? If it's for servicing the car in some way, why is it in such a prominent spot? Thanks. --Sean 15:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WAG: It may have something to do with the advanced vehicle detection systems in newer models of luxury cars, for example some cars are equipped with "back up cameras" that show you the view behind your car; others have proximity sensors to tell you when you are going to hit something behind you, and they either sound a warning or automatically apply the brakes for you. My guess is that this has something to do with one of those sorts of systems. --Jayron32 15:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it's like my MINI (BMW), opening the cover reveals a threaded hole for screwing in a tow hook. There's a similar port in the front grill. -- Coneslayer (talk) 15:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed a rear tow point. The tow hook screws in once you remove the little panel. See this link. Dismas|^(talk) 19:32, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WARNING: It's not intended for towing the car serious distances - it's just enough to winch the car up onto the bed of a tow truck or to pull you out when you get stuck in snow or mud or something. You should find the eyelet/hook thingy somewhere in with the tools for changing the wheel, etc. It's exceedingly dangerous to use it for long distance towing because the hook can easily become unthreaded! (One of the members of my local car club found this out to his cost when towing his car just over a mile to the nearest garage!) SteveBaker (talk) 20:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, it's not literally a tow hook, it's a tie-down hook to keep the car on top of the carrier which is actually toting it around. Gzuckier (talk) 06:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On page 113 of the owner's manual for my '09 MINI Cooper'S (which is a BMW design) calls it a "tow fitting" and talks about towing the car using it. When I've had cars put on the back of the carrier, they've chained up the axles and put those nylon webbing things around the wheels...I've only seen them use the tow fitting to pull the car onto the bed of the truck. But other car manufacturers may be different. SteveBaker (talk) 03:06, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all for the (surprising) answer! --Sean 15:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hepatitis a

My partner developed hepatits a and jaundice in pakistan and was hospitalised. Is there a posibility that i could contract hepatitis a from him? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kathyhollyoake (talk • contribs) 15:26, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to any "is it possible?" type of question is typically going to be "almost anything is possible". To get a useful answer, please see a doctor. You could also read the Hepatitis article. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or even Hepatitis A. 130.126.109.178 (talk) 17:26, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Made in Korea

If I buy a product in the US and it has the label "Made in Korea", what are the chances that it was made in North Korea as opposed to South Korea? Googlemeister (talk) 18:13, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much zero. StuRat (talk) 18:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to sports federations, for example, "Korea" usually refers to the South (Korea Republic). North Korea is usually called "DPR Korea" or "Korea DPR" or something to that effect. Rimush (talk) 18:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, with the D being for Democratic. I wonder, does any country which is actually democratic put that in it's name ? Or is it the same effect as "Honest Al's Discount TVs" (if Al were really honest, he wouldn't need to convince people by putting it in his name). StuRat (talk) 19:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You made me wonder that too, so I tried to find out. Defining democracy in terms of Polity IV, the only democracy with "Democratic" in its full name that I can find is Sri Lanka. --Tango (talk) 20:06, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And how many non-democratic Democratic nations did you find ? StuRat (talk) 01:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A dozen or so. --Tango (talk) 02:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that certainly is a lopsided enough ratio to support the "Honest Al" theory. StuRat (talk) 03:31, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is. (A dozen or so is all of them - I went through List of countries searching for "demo".) --Tango (talk) 16:48, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about the Democratic Republic of the Congo? 92.30.145.113 (talk) 23:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to our Democratic Republic of the Congo article, "Mobutu institutionalized corruption to prevent political rivals from challenging his control". They now have new leadership and a new constitution as of 2006, and corruption is down somewhat, so maybe they can now be considered truly democratic. StuRat (talk) 01:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think one should reserve judgement for more than 4 years before declaring a country democratic. They've only had the one general election so far, that's not really enough to see if they are going to make democracy work. --Tango (talk) 02:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A country where the military rapes and kills at will is not democratic. Rimush (talk) 09:32, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What if everyone votes that the military should be allowed to rape and kill at will? Or, at least, what if the raping and killing does not interfere with the process of free elections? "Democratic" does not necessarily mean "good and just", just that people get to vote. APL (talk) 16:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heroin? SteveBaker (talk) 20:32, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In Prague, I once saw a Cold War-era coffee cup marked "MADE IN D.P.R.K." In English! -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:03, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

100% for nuclear bombs and missiles. Just don't let Jack Bauer hear about it. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I once came across a website where you could find DPRK stuff, primarily propaganda like cartoons and books IIRC and stuff to indicate your support for the DPRK. I don't know how much, if any of it was actually made in the DPRK of course Nil Einne (talk) 02:47, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_exploration

I was just looking for pretty pictures and came across this one, look at the page and under the heading rational there is a picture od Buzz, and it states that he is a chriastina, what relavance does this have to tghe rest of the article, I would try to find out for my self, and am , there are 2 ways to go about doing this, 1 is to read it my self, and 2 is to read your responses tomorrow —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.172.58.82 (talk) 19:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The caption says "Astronaut Buzz Aldrin, a Christian, had a personal Communion service when he first arrived on the surface of the Moon". It's describing the extension of religion into space, which is arguably part of space exploration. I suppose one could argue that it belongs in a separate article, though (along with our recent question about which direction Muslim astronauts pray). StuRat (talk) 19:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since those are the only two interesting facts we have about religion in space, I'm not sure it really warrants an article. It might warrant its own section in the space exploration article, I suppose. --Tango (talk) 19:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

<shrug> we already have an article about Sex in space - so why not?! SteveBaker (talk) 20:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we need an article about Golf on the moon, starting (and ending, so far) with Alan Shepard's attempt to turn the moon into a driving range. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about two facts. An 18 page guidebook was published for Muslims in space as part of the Angkasawan programme so there's probably a decent amount you could write about that. [1] I know things which came up include fasting and prayer times and the ref also mentions ablution. I believe we've discussed some of this a while back (I'm not referring to the mention of one aspect referred to above). And there are other things like kosher food and celebrating the Jewish shabbat [2]. Edit: Wait why are we even talking about this? We already have a Religion in space and it's existed long before this discussion. P.S. Golf in space Nil Einne (talk) 02:33, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A third interesting fact is mentioned at Apollo 8#Historical importance — the astronauts read from Genesis and NASA was subsequently sued, and although the lawsuit was dismissed, it apparently made NASA skittish about public displays of religion in space by these government employees, so Aldrin's Communion was private. (Side note: I think this belongs very, very low on the list of reasons Apollo 8 was "historically important".) Comet Tuttle (talk) 23:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no law against government employees displaying religious beliefs (or lack thereof). But maybe they should have had a disclaimer like "these views do not necessarily reflect those of the management." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True, but they aren't allowed to make it appear to a reasonable observer that the government is officially endorsing (or favoring) any religion, and the 3 most prominent Americans in the world at that moment reciting Genesis on their way back from the first human orbit around another world, with the US having spent billions of dollars to elevate them to the position where they do that — this reasonable observer has a problem with that. Comet Tuttle (talk) 01:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As an American watching on TV at the time, it never occurred to me that their reading from Genesis was anything more than their personal expression of how they felt at the time. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:57, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Considering all the taxpayer money it would cost to lift even a crucifix into orbit, the atheists may have a point. StuRat (talk) 01:48, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In case anyone misses it above, we already have religion in space Nil Einne (talk) 02:48, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EDLP

Hi. I have just been reading an article about pricing structure in supermarkets. It turns out that "EDLP" is one strategy that supermarkets use to lure so-called "large basket shoppers". The quote is:

Furthermore, EDLP stores get a greater than expected share of business from large basket    
shoppers; HILO stores get a greater than expected share from small basket shoppers.

Does anyone know what EDLP stands for ? Robinh (talk) 20:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Every Day Low Pricing. SteveBaker (talk) 20:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) This link says it's "Every-Day-Low-Price" and the other principal strategy is apparently HILO, the "high-low strategy". Everyday low price is our stubby article on EDLP. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys. Obvious when you know. Robinh (talk) 20:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just rewrote the Everyday low price article, mostly based on 2 one-page web pages. If you have further information (on EDLP, or on the Hi-Lo strategy, which has no article yet), please go for it. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the quote makes sense, because people who shop for sales will only get the few items they want which are on sale at the HILO, then go to the everyday low price stores for everything else. I tend to do this myself. StuRat (talk) 01:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is HILO advertising the loss-leaders but having higher prices on everything else? 78.146.107.183 (talk) 20:11, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]