Miscellaneous desk
< March 17	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 19 >

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.

March 18

What kind of Violoncello is this and where would I be able to buy one?

The title pretty much says it all, but here is a description and a picture.

I was wondering what material this Violoncello is, and why it has no backside compaired to other Cellos I have seen on eBay? I had been thinking it was a type of plastic subsitute, but I wasn't exactly sure, plus I am not familiar with shopping for insturements online, and I had asked because I was looking to buy a Cello.

Also, which sounds better? A wooden Cello or a aluminum/plastic subsitute?

Here are some picture references of Kanon Wakeshima and her Violoncello:

http://vitamindrop.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/wakeshima_stillprom1.jpg

http://jpopayuhongaku.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/30d44e62280100_full.jpg

http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/12326279/Kanon+Wakeshima+profile.jpg

http://a0.vox.com/6a011016392491860c011016767cd0860d-500pi

67.169.145.45 (talk) 00:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My, she's cute. No idea what sort of instrument she has, but there do exist good non-wood cellos. Yo Yo Ma speaks highly of this one[1], which is made of carbon fiber, and is inexpensive for a cello. (There exist banjos at twice that price.) I would value Yo Yo Ma's opinion of a cello. PhGustaf (talk) 00:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the time has long since passed - long since passed - since it's been necessary to spell out violoncello. The word cello is fully accepted, even in the most formal of contexts, as the word for the musical instrument. There are still some pockets of resistance holding out for needless formality, but they dwindle by the minute. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 01:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At least the older spelling leaves us opportunities to mock poseurs who spell it "violincello". PhGustaf (talk) 01:38, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the 60s, when nudity was all the rage, there was some deal about a woman playing the cello topless. Johnny Carson remarked that she brought down the house when she played "Flight of the Bumblebee". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My great-aunt Lala, of blessed memory, was a cellist, and saw that show. She was much incensed, especially because the performer was sweating onto a "beautiful instrument". That said, I've always found female cello players, both those I've known and those I haven't, to be especially attractive. Perhaps it's about the intensity; perhaps it's about the posture. Hard not to fall in love with her[2]. PhGustaf (talk) 04:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC) [reply]

We do have an article on the topless cellist, Charlotte Moorman. ReverendWayne (talk) 04:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And you don't even have to acknowledge its origin by apostrophising it as an abbreviation - 'cello. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 07:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything in those pictures which suggests that there is anything special about the cellos in them. --ColinFine (talk) 08:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Kanon's cello has no back, and I was wondering why that was. Also, her cellos look plastic, and I was just wondering who makes a plastic subsitute cello. And I say violoncello mainly because I prefer the full name sometimes. And as for Yo Yo Ma, I looked at the cellos that Luis and Clark (or something like that) made, and it's $7,000?! I can get a completely new wooden cello, plus a violin, for $100 on eBay. Though all I was asking really was who makes plastic cellos, and why that one that Kanon has has no back.

67.169.145.45 (talk) 04:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I should point out it's easily possible those cellos are simply props. The use of props is of course common in professional photography and they may do that with the cello for a variety of reasons. This File:Kanon Wakeshima 20090705 Japan Expo 05.jpg however would be a real cello Nil Einne (talk) 10:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are electric cellos. Electric violins are available too. The reason they don't have a body is that, in a "normal" stringed instrument, the body provides the amplification for the sound. If you are plugging into an amplification system, you don't need a solid body at all as the amp and speakers fulfil that function. Hence the backless versions. As for a maker, you might be interested in this: [3]--TammyMoet (talk) 16:03, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(EC)But one of her three cellos is red. She calls it 七千重/Nanachie. You can see it here. See 2009.03.13(fri). I read all entries but there was no mention about who made it. Oda Mari (talk) 16:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The coat might be Japanese lacquer or Cashew paint. Oda Mari (talk) 17:08, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I see nothing in the four pictures you posted that suggests that they are not wooden cellos, with unusually coloured lacquer. My first cello (a factory-made East European one) was bright orange, but still wooden. (There's also nothing in those pictures that shows a missing back). --ColinFine (talk) 18:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

how do companies benefit from foreign exchange swaps?

123.3.110.165 (talk) 01:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Forex swap explains this. SteveBaker (talk) 02:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inserting a brain chip nasally

I'm writing a science fiction story, and I was trying to come up with a way that a character could have a chip inserted into his brain without requiring brain surgery. I remembered learning about how Ancient Egyptians would remove the brain through the nose of corpses, and I'm wondering if it would be pushing the bounds of realism to have the chip inserted through the nose. Is this a feasible option, assuming the chip could somehow attach itself to the brain? 169.231.8.41 (talk) 06:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perfectly feasible, although you'd still have to go through some bone & soft tissue to get to it. See, for instance, pituitary tumour removal performed through the nose. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:20, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One scenario perhaps worth considering is: does the chip actually have to be in contact with the brain? Considering that EEG machines are quite capable of reading brain waves through a bony skull and a thick layer of scalp, is it possible in your sci-fi scenario to have a contactless chip work the other way round and have an electrical signal affect the brain waves from afar (ie. just placed up the nose near the brain, without all that annoying brain surgery)? Astronaut (talk) 06:34, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to at least be marginally realistic, you should also consider what the chip is supposed to do, and perhaps have its location be related to its purpose; have it placed on the skull or inside the head near a place where it will affect a certain function. --Jayron32 06:44, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on the science fiction genre and how far into the future you're looking, you could have someone spice the victims food or drink with nanotech robots - each about the size of a bacterium - have them make their way individually into the blood stream - then, when they reach the blood-brain barrier, attach themselves to the appropriate spot and assemble themselves into the required device. SteveBaker (talk) 12:04, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or insufflate them in some cocaine or something if the nasal route is desired. --Sean 14:54, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Using nanobots provides an opportunity not to target any single spot in the brain, which allows for more meaningful and useful effects, since things like learning and reasoning and recognition have no brain locations... or maybe they do, see grandmother cell. 213.122.16.62 (talk) 13:43, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in lobotomy. If I understand correctly, some procedures were done either through the thin part of bone in the eye socket or through the nasal cavity. These were more like gross (in both senses of the word!) manipulations of the brain matter, but there may be stuff there of interest to you. Matt Deres (talk) 14:58, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)As an alternative to inserting the chip up the nose you could go behind an eye. See the articles Leucotome and Orbitoclast instruments developed for Lobotomy. Apparently Raquel Welch has medical experience of another way in by injection but it needs a little Submarine. -Cuddlyable3 (talk) 15:00, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

heck, why not get Shakesperean and go through the ear - nanobots in a liquid dropped in the ear of some sleeping person, making their way up the aural nerve system. It's SciFi, dude - style counts for more than veracity. --Ludwigs2 15:01, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the wonders of British invention - we already have nasal chip insertion - look![4] :-) Alansplodge (talk) 17:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In Total Recall, Arnold pulled a brain chip out through his nose...so it has kind of been done before. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:37, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The OP's best bet might be to write to the film's creators and ask how they did it. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:51, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any penetration into the brain, whether from the sphenoid sinus , from the orbit of the eye, or through the top of the skull, would be "brain surgery." Surgeons routinely used a holesaw called a trephin to penetrate the skull well over 200 years ago, to correct depressed skull fractures or to remove blood clots, and even with no knowledge of germs, a large portion of patients (a quarter or a half in some reports) survived. In your sci fi, it should not be that advantageous to insert a chip from the sinus rather than by lifting a flap of scalp and drilling through the skull, especially if the sinus route would require pushing a lead through a long span of brain tissue to get to the target portion of the brain. Undergrads were placing leads into rat brains by stereotaxic surgery 30 years ago to do electrical recording and brain stimulation for junior level psychophysiology experiments. As long as it is speculative for a story, could a chip be inserted in an artery in the neck and steered up into the brain? Edison (talk) 19:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You dropped at least one zero from your trepanation date. Matt Deres (talk) 23:07, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trephaning 2000 years ago is taken care of by the "well over" phrase. The outcomes were better in 1810 than in AD 10. Edison (talk) 04:00, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weren't the older procedures performed using a drill rather than a holesaw? --Carnildo (talk) 23:42, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, they used a hole saw in ancient Greece, to make a circular opening in the skull. A "drill" sounds like a device intended to make a tiny opening. One goal by the early 19th century was to open the skull without penetrating the dura mater, or lining of the brain, which a drill would have been more likely to pierce. Cave men used a flint knife to make repeated circles until the skull was penetrated. They did it to correct depressed skull fractures, but have also been accused of unnecessary surgery to "let out evil spirits." In either case, skulls found by archeologists show partial or complete healing of the skull in such operations done even in the Stone Age. The ancient Greeks knew that an impact on one side of the skull could cause a dangerous blood clot on the opposite side which could be removed by such an operation. Edison (talk) 04:00, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trepanning is needed like a hole in the head. Oh wait. HalfShadow 16:02, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He has High Hopes. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:33, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One problem is that the situation doesn't allow any time for recovery, so the chip must be inserted without any recovery time; they must immediately be ready for action. 169.231.8.81 (talk) 22:27, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The chip can be placed on or under the skin over the location of the brain that it needs to access, then nano-thin, highly controllable electrodes could push their way through skull and into the brain. --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 04:21, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you really want an "out there" kind of idea - how about not bothering with the chip? You could have some kind of external stimulator (let say something that fits over your fingertip that stimulates the nerves of the skin) - and have it send data to your brain that introduces something like a computer virus into some relatively little used part of the subconscious and takes over the brain's circuitry directly to perform whatever function it needs to do. You could have the users/victims of this technology have some kind of silly mental defect while they are infected - like maybe anything that is colored blue now seems to smells faintly of pine-needles! (This idea somewhat comes from Snow Crash) SteveBaker (talk) 14:12, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course all this will be moot after the next computer trade show, when a certain corporation will announce the iSnot. PhGustaf (talk) 04:07, 20 March 2010 (UTC) [reply]

I seem to remember that one of the Mission: Impossible films has a plot where the bad guys insert time bombs into the brains of two of the good guys. They do this by forcibly injecting them through their nose cavity, propelled with highly pressured air. This injection does not damage the agents' bodies but once the time bombs explode, the agents die immediately, without showing any outwardly visible wounds. This seems pretty similar to what you're after, only that the devices would be used to control the agents, not to kill them. JIP | Talk 20:26, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

about matlab

how to stabilize the video using matlab???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jk143 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How to stabilise what video? You need to explain the problem you are having in detail if we are going to stand a chance of being able to help. --Tango (talk) 11:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean Matlab? DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:48, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Gates' car?

What kind of car does Bill Gates drive?196.37.99.82 (talk) 12:05, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Porsche 959. Apparently. Vimescarrot (talk) 12:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if it has a bumper sticker that says "THIS is my Other Car". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Its the kind that has all different versions of windows in it of course?--79.76.137.66 (talk) 02:39, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

. . . and it's forever crashing. 86.4.186.107 (talk) 16:58, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Luckily it's quite easy to recover from a crash. Simply close all the windows, switch it off, back it up, switch it back on and open all the windows again. Zunaid 17:23, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The worst part is having to type the admin password in every time you want to shift gears. SteveBaker (talk) 19:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...or having to restart for lane changes to take effect. Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 12:40, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

eight-pack

Will a child of 13 years,who is an eight pack grow tall?117.196.140.248 (talk) 14:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's an "eight pack"? --Sean 14:57, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's 33-1/3% more than one of these. A rare anatomic variation of the Rectus abdominis muscle is called an eightpack. A person might have an eightpack but no one can "be" an eightpack. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 15:07, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rulers and Nationality

Mykola Azarov is the new prime minister of the Ukraine, but can bearly speak Ukraine, he is from Russia. Hitler was from Austria but rules germany. what percentage of national rulers, rule a country from which they do not originate? are there any other notable examples of interest? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.172.58.82 (talk) 15:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

George I and George II of Great Britain as well as William the Conqueror come to mind, although William was a special case. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barrack Obama according to some, Uncle Joe Stalin was from Georgia (the country not the US state), although the USSR did possess Georgia during his time in power. Googlemeister (talk) 15:53, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's likely a BLP violation, unless you're just being funny. :) For example, many of those who believe that are apparently from Mars. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories. Rmhermen (talk) 15:58, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which, if you notice is where the link in my earlier statement goes. Googlemeister (talk) 16:06, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's generally unwise to use the title of one article as the text for a link to a different article ("the principle of least surprise" and all that). I would have used the "according to some" bit of that sentence as the link text. --Tango (talk) 16:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Technically Barrack Obama is only a redirect to Barack Obama not the title of an article. Nil Einne (talk) 11:26, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Founding Fathers of the United States were so concerned about mixed loyalties that the US Constitution requires the President to be a natural-born citizen of the US (with an obvious exception for those born before there was a US). StuRat (talk) 15:58, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Napoleon Bonaparte originated from Corsica. To this day there is still a strong nationalist sentiment on the island (not because of Napoleon of course).
Current Taiwanese president Ma Ying-jeou was born in British administered Hong Kong to Hakka parents from the Chinese mainland.
Otto of Greece -- son of a philhellene Bavarian king -- was elected to the throne of Kingdom of Greece. He was later deposed and a Danish prince was elected George I of Greece. ---Kvasir (talk) 16:08, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the elective Kings of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth were foreign princes, which is what eventually led to the Partitions of Poland. See List_of_Polish_monarchs#Polish-Lithuanian_Commonwealth for a list; the first such elected King was Henry of Valois who thought so much of being elected Polish King that he pretty much forgot about it after inheriting the throne of France. He never formally abdicated, he just up and walked away from his role as King of Poland. The next two centuries featured contested elections and various wars of succession. Foreign elected kings often raided the Polish treasuries and milked the country dry of resources for their own countries. It was an absolute disaster, governmentally speaking, until Prussia, Austia, and Russia put an end to the whole fiasco, and ended the existance of the state. --Jayron32 17:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alberto Fujimori was born in Peru to Japanese immigrants, and has dual Japanese and Peruvian citizenship. His first language, learnt from his parents, was Japanese. He later learned Spanish. He became President of Peru, but ended up fleeing Peru and absconding to Japan. He was later extradited from Chile, and is now languishing in a Peruvian prison where he's serving 25 years. This was the first time that an elected head of state has been extradited back to his home country, tried, and convicted of human rights violations. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 17:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

James I of England (Scottish, when Scotland was independent) and William III of England (Dutch) were other foreigners who accepted invitations to take the English throne. --Normansmithy (talk) 18:30, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The current Governor General of Canada is from Haiti, if that counts. And because I cannot miss an opportunity to mention the crusades, the first three crusader kings of Jerusalem were from what is now France/Belgium. That kind of thing happened a lot more often in the Middle Ages, of course, and in the ancient world too - the Roman emperor Trajan was from Spain, although that was of course Roman at the time. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:35, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about our GG from Canada, but they don't really "rule". The ultimate head of state is Queen Elizabeth II, whose citizenship I'm not sure (or is she constitutionally a Canadian?) Besides, foreign-born GG isn't new, or unique to Canada. Most early ones in the Commonwealth realms hailed from the UK.

Also I didn't mention about any conquering kings and emperors because that's pretty obvious. Same with colonies and their foreign governors/head of state. --Kvasir (talk) 18:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, Elizabeth is above questions of citizenship. She's not a citizen of any country, in particular not of any of the countries over which she reigns. She might even be regarded as stateless, in a sense. Yet, there are laws in these countries that dictate her behaviour and treatment. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can a stateless individual hold diplomatic immunity? Googlemeister (talk) 19:28, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't answer that. But when she visits other countries, UK diplomats are obviously highly involved with their local counterparts in making the arrangements, and the local people obviously accept that the UK people are acting on behalf of the UK government and/or on the Queen's personal behalf - but because she's their queen, not because she's a citizen of their country as such. We could do down many hypothetical paths here. Like: if the Queen was visiting the USA and got it into her head she really liked the place and wanted to stay, could she apply for political asylum, or US citizenship? Would she be in breach of any British or Commonwealth laws by so doing? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

She can not qualify for political asylum as she does not even come close to meeting refugee status according to US qualifications.

This situation is not actually as "absurd" as it sounds. There are many monarchies in exile, what we call pretenders. One example is Constantine II of Greece who fled Greece in the 1967 coup. According to our article he travels under a Danish diplomatic passport (being a descendant of the Danish royal house and a Prince of Denmark in his own right). He was stripped of his Greek citizenship in 1994, which means he had one. It's not clear though the restoring of the 1952 constitution made him a Greek citizen like everyone else, or he had one while king. Over the years it seems there has been a constant battle between Constantine and the Greek government over his rights as a Greek citizen, use of his name, and access to his property in Greece. Claiming political asylum isn't that far fetch for a monarch in exile. --Kvasir (talk) 19:55, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leopold I of Belgium was from Bavaria. Alansplodge (talk) 21:29, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference between a monarch in exile and a pretender (although they can overlap). To be a pretender, there has to be someone else with a more widely accepted claim to the throne, but there is no need to be out of the country. A monarch in exile has to be out of the country, but there doesn't have to be another monarch (the monarchy can just have been abolished). --Tango (talk) 21:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah i was speaking more about the overlap case -- pretender of an abolished monarchy -- which is the case with most pretenders these days. --Kvasir (talk) 22:33, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 February 15#Head of State Citizenship since while not quite the same question, many of the examples and discussion that arose may be relevant here. As with all things that relate to human nationality and origin, it's not always going to be simple. For example Abhisit Vejjajiva who I gave in the previous discussion was born and received his education in the UK, however he returned/went to Thailand not long after his education IIRC, and as I pointed out in the earlier discussion could have been a Thai citizen from birth (being born to a prominent Thai family) and even could have always even considered himself a Thai citizen rather then British. In a more hypothetical case, the children of diplomats or some soldiers may be born and spent much of their early lives overseas however they would almost definitely be citizens from birth of the country of their parents and many would vehemently dispute it if you claim this means they don't originate from the country of their parents. BTW in terms of monarchs, since this isn't a question about citizenship but about origin, as someone mentioned above the monarch of the commonwealth realm countries is born in, educated in and spents much of their life in the UK. If that country isn't the UK, some would question whether these people can really understand or represent their country and this is one of the catalysts for the republican movement in many of countries. (Of course in all cases of a monarchy, some would consider the monarch so disconnected from the 'common people' that it doesn't matter if they were born in and educated in the country they represent.) Nil Einne (talk) 11:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maximilian I of Mexico was Austrian. Weepy.Moyer (talk) 19:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

South Korean president Lee Myung-bak was born in Osaka in 1941 (Japan proper, but at a time when Japan and Korea were united in one state), and North Korean supreme leader Kim Jong-il was apparently born in the Russian Far East, or, if you believe the state, on a mountain that according to many but not all is on the Chinese-Korean border. 84.46.27.15 (talk) 03:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

going out with an older guy

hi, is there anything wrong with going out with an older guy?? I met this guy on the internet and we went to meat up and he is nearly 40 yrs old but we got on well and was a good time been seeing eachother a few times and nothign wrong "physically" but some of my friends are a bit grossed out I told them thats not their problem and they should leave us alone but has got me thinking..... what do you think??? Salza boo (talk) 15:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To some extent it depends on how old you are yourself. But let's suppose there's a 20 year gap or so. If you happen to get married, when you're 40 he'll be 60. That's when the age gap might start to really show. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What might happen in 20 years' time in the event of getting married is not something that most people would base their decision on as to whether or not to go out with someone in the present. I say, "Yes, great idea!" --Richardrj ^talk ^email 16:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's true, which is all the more reason to bring it up. The young are not especially known for thinking toward the future. That does not mean one should refuse to date someone just because of an age disparity. It's just something to potentially consider, at some point down the road. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:53, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is also going to depend on your culture. Some cultures, a 20 year old woman with a 40 year old man would not be viewed negatively. In other cultures, there would be social prohibitions frowning on this match. There are various legal implications of relations between minors and adults that will vary based on location, so if you are a minor, there could be legal issues. Googlemeister (talk) 15:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. If the OP is underage, that could spell big trouble for the 40-year-old, and that's definitely something to be considered in the here-and-now, not just down the road. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:55, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the Ref Desk is not a discussion forum. We can't answer your question. — Lomn 15:50, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, I'll undo the collapse for a bit to ask: Isn't there a Wikipedia article on this type of relationship? I was a little surprised to find that a search for things like spring/autumn romance did not yield anything. (To the original poster: Know that most of the answerers here are "older guys", so it is in their own self-interest to give you an enthusiastic "yes, great idea!" Comet Tuttle (talk) 16:35, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course there's a Wikipedia article on it, there's one on everything! It's at Age disparity in sexual relationships. --Tango (talk) 16:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointer. Wow, what a bad article. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:03, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, nobody said Wikipedia had a good article on everything! That article should probably be moved to Slang terms for age disparate relationships or something, really... --Tango (talk) 17:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See [5] for a graph of the "Half age plus seven" dating rule. Some think it favors the older party a bit. Edison (talk) 19:10, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. This graph also says dating before age 14 (with anyone) is unacceptable. --Kvasir (talk) 19:14, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If we restrict ourselves to sexual relationships, then the law would tend to agree. (Give or take, depending on jurisdiction.) --Tango (talk) 21:58, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I came to the conclusion that this was perhaps how the rule was derived. --Kvasir (talk) 22:07, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My take was the difficulty of keeping the upper and lower limits on either side of the individual's age, given that (1/2 of 13) + 7 = 13-1/2. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, any point less than 14 the lower limit is greater than the upper limit according to the rule, which is invalid. --Kvasir (talk) 17:14, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We could fix that by increasing the complexity of the equation to that of second or third order. Googlemeister (talk) 19:21, 19 March 2010 (UTC) [reply]

I would be interested in seeing that asked in the math reference desk. :) --Kvasir (talk) 19:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is the issue? If you are 12, date no one younger than 13. If you are 20, date no one younger than 17 (been there, done that). If you are 60, the lower limit is 37. If you are 90, then the lower limit is 52. Seems quite sound, all around. This equation was taught in elementary school algebra. Edison (talk) 03:50, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Except that while the 12 year old is not supposed to date anyone younger then 13, the 13 year old can't date the 12 year old according to the rule. Specifically, the 13 year old can't date someone younger then 13.5 years old. But the 13.5 years old can't date anyone younger then 13.75 years old. And the 13.75 year old can't... The 14 year old can date a 14 year old although depending on how exact you demand this to be, this could be difficult. Past that age it starts to get more realistic. For example a 15 year old can date a 14.5 year old. (Clearly no problem for the 14.5 year old who can date a 15 year old being older then the 14.25 year old minimum, the 14.25 year old also having no problem with the 14.5 year old since they can date anyone 14.125 years or older...) If there is exactly one day difference between a couple then they will first be able to date when the younger one is exactly? 14 years and one day old) Nil Einne (talk) 08:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC) [reply]

For our protagonist, it is not his/her problem if the paramour is breaking the rule. Nothing says that it is reflexive and universal. All the same, it is apparently intended to set a lower limit for the older person's choice of a younger dating partner. There may be some limit of the older one being 14 or older for it to avoid the problem pointed out by Nil Einne. Edison (talk) 01:02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I was the only one to point it out, it was basically what everyone above you was discussing. Also I don't really understand "For our protagonist, it is not his/her problem if the paramour is breaking the rule. Nothing says that it is reflexive and universal". The whole point of the rule is it doesn't technically set a limit on the upper age of your partner, but if both parties follow the rule then it does set a limit on the age appropriateness of relationship. If only the younger party follows the rule, then the rule generally becomes irrelevant (not entirely since under the age of 14 the rule semi breaks down as we've been discussing.) and the issue of age appropriateness isn't answered. Since you were the one who suggested the rule in the first place, I had presumed you were suggesting the older party should follow it since if not it doesn't seem relevant. Of course, a more complex reading of the rule might be that for that if one is to follow it then they always need to apply it to the younger party in the relationship (be that them or the other party) rather then applying it to themselves when it's irrelevant (i.e. when they are the younger party). In any case even if we do apply the rule below 14, while most would suggest a 6 year old shouldn't be dating at all, if they are somehow 'dating' I don't think many would agree that a 10 year old is the youngest person they should date even from the viewpoint of the 6 year old. Nil Einne (talk) 08:41, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong in going put or datind or going around with the old guy at all. If your are compatible and happy witth him that all matters. I myself dated the guy exactly double of my age and usre to think that it could be wrong but i realized that nothing is wrong in that at all. I was never happy like that before and we never had any phisical relations but still loved each other so much, i believe after my parents he was the one who loved me the most. We were also thinking of getting married. The reason i am using past tense everytime is that, he not theer anymore in this world. And i cherish all my moment spent with him.

Painting II

I painted something using oild based paints, I mewesed it up by doing alot of grey that I now want to change to whit, it is possible to cover up the greay with the white, even thougfh I made the grey by mixing the same white with black? what technique should I use to do this? do i just need to apply layer after layer? how can i remove the small details of the grey, it has ruined an other wise wonderful picture, in my opinion —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.172.58.82 (talk) 20:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the oil paint is not yet completely dry (which may take weeks, depending on how thick it is) or perhaps even if it is dry, you can usually remove it with varsol or turpentine. Dip the tip of a cotton swab into a tiny bit of the removal agent, and then rub the area you wish to remove very gently with it; repeat until all the paint you want to remove is gone. Just remember to keep the removal agent restricted to the area you want to remove and to keep changing the cotton swab. It can be a messy procedure if you are not very careful, and can also affect surrounding pigment. You can paint over the grey with white once the grey is dry. White is opaque and covers almost everything fairly well. *Consumer warning: I know quite a bit about acrylics and water colours, but not much about oils. Bielle (talk) 22:21, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that removal of the paint would tend to remove adjacent paint, as well, so I'd just wait until it dries and paint over it. StuRat (talk) 04:18, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may have to paint several coats of whit to get enough opacity. Or perhaps even mix up your own more intense white, using pigments. Are you using zinc oxide white? Titanium oxide is probably not suitable for canvas but would be more intensely white. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:51, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]