Miscellaneous desk
< April 29	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	May 1 >

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 30

Stoplights

Are the some stoplights that are remotly controlled by a human?Accdude92 (talk) 00:25, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are some that can be controlled by a police officer who is directing traffic. Looie496 (talk) 02:25, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well there are these ones with these cameras and they do not have the inductive loop sensors and the always change at the right time, is why I ask.Accdude92 (talk) 02:27, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In large cities central traffic control offices can control both the cycle timing, cycle order, and in some cases, cause 4 way reds. In central Sydney the other weekend, for a diplomatic party, the lights went four way red across a number of blocks in sequence to time a few bus loads of ruling class individuals through the city I was trying to walk through. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:45, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How do I know if thats happening?Accdude92 (talk) 03:50, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where I live in Raleigh, NC (and I suspect many places in the U.S.) there is a control box near many intersections; I see police officers manually changing the lights via some sort of small keyboard or wired remote control inside of it. --Jayron32 05:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In parts of the US, at least, ambulances are equipped with devices to change lights to allow them to go through a controlled intersection on a green light. 216.93.212.245 (talk) 21:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A pelican crossing is a type of crossing where traffic lights can be controlled by a pedestrian.

—Wavelength (talk) 05:35, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you're in a large city and the central office is changing the lights for various purposes, there's no way for you to tell unless the lights are doing something really odd such as "all red" conditions. Dismas|^(talk) 06:05, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Portable temporary stop lights that are used during road mending usually have the possibility of manual control. Example. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 15:09, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is more than one kind of traffic detector used to control lights. Just because there is no inductive loop embedded into the pavement doesn't mean they're not sensing traffic. Sometimes the camera itself is the traffic detector. Nowadays computers can easily tell the difference between an image of a car compared with empty road-way. See Traffic_light_control_and_coordination#Non-intrusive_detectors.

APL (talk) 23:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In San Francisco, the signals at the intersection of California and Powell are controlled by a person in a signal tower, because the cable car lines that cross there can't see well. I don't remember if there are auto lights there too, though... --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 23:28, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In Bangkok a good number of traffic lights are manually controlled by traffic police. (I can't find much about this on the internet, but here is an op-ed criticizing the system. If I remember correctly, the police have little huts they sit in near traffic lights, and that is where they are controlling the changes of the lights. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:03, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian s

How do I type the Romanian s with a thingy below it (like in Nicolae Ceausescu)? --75.40.204.106 (talk) 01:22, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you're working on an article, you can do it by clicking on the "Special characters" link above the edit box and then choose it from the selections offered. Dismas|^(talk) 04:04, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See S-comma. -- Wavelength (talk) 05:31, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Romanian Computing Information (Penn State). -- Wavelength (talk) 06:12, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The unicode input article discusses how to do this in popular desktop computing environments. Following its prescription, in GNOME, hold down ctrl-shift and type u218 and then release ctrl-shift. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 13:27, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The character is also available as an insert option in the edit screen using 'Latin', it has all those unusual letters you are likely to need. Mikenorton (talk) 15:13, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-and-paște alșo workș. ←Bașeball Bugș ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:05, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the Romanian S-comma and T-comma (Șș Țț) are very widely substituted in typing with S-cedilla and T-cedilla (Şş Ţţ), which is technically incorrect. See Romanian alphabet for details. So the name Ceaușescu could also be seen as Ceauşescu or Ceausescu. --Theurgist (talk) 02:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Driving stick

There is conflicting advice all over the Internet regarding the best ways to drive stick (i.e. manual transmission). By 'best ways' I mean A) best for the transmission's health and life, and B) best for fuel efficiency. I've been trying to find online 'how to' advice from either a car manufacturer or consumer reports, or some reliable, reputable source. But all I am finding is advice written by self-described experts with unknown credentials. Can someone help me find advice written from a reliable source? Kingturtle = (talk) 12:34, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can always trust Tom and Ray, the car talk guys. --- Medical geneticist (talk) 12:40, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you asking at what rpm you should change up? It's going to depend on the car. The driver's manual might give some guidance on the optimal rev range for your car. --Tango (talk) 13:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No printed advice ia a substitute for learning to change gear by practice. A manual transmission will usually outlast the rest of a car unless it is badly treated. Bad treatment would include grating gears by incompetent use of the clutch, or changing down in gears to force the engine do the work of the brakes. There are two distinct styles of driving a manual transmission: 1) best for fuel efficiency. This is keeping in as high gear as possible without labouring; the engine probably gives best economy in the 1500 - 3000 rpm range (never accelerate hard), and 2) best for performance. This is changing as often as necessary to keep the engine in its maximum power range, probably 4000 - 7000 rpm. Some older British cars have marks on the speedometer that suggest maximum speeds in individual gears. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 14:54, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd dispute one point of this - engine braking is a perfectly normal way of controlling speed on long hills. Exxolon (talk) 19:09, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's a normal (and strongly recommended) way to maintain a low speed, but it isn't a good way of reducing speed. That may be what Cuddlyable3 was talking about. --Tango (talk) 20:20, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. A driving style of rapid gear down-changes at every bend that is common in race cars that are designed for it is not the way to treat an ordinary road car. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly why? This seems to an area where in my lifetime one piece of dogma has been replaced by another, neither ever properly explained. HiLo48 (talk) 18:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you are rapidly slowing down to go round the bend then you need to rapidly change down gears too. You should be using the breaks to slow down, but you should still be changing gear if you have slowed down enough that you need to. --Tango (talk) 18:14, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BRAKES are good to have in a car, BREAKS less so. Racing cars generally have more gear ratios than road cars because the are meant to be driven within a smaller range of engine r.p.m. Their gearboxes are designed for rapid changes; paddles on the steering wheel of F1 cars facilitate quick gear changes. A road car's manual gearbox is simpler to save cost and its synchromesh is only expected to cope with granny's sedate changes. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:53, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One small point if you want to find more sources. You might have more luck looking for British or similar sources, given the relatively popularity of manuals here. I'm guessing you've tried that, though, given the wording of the question. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 15:07, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In normal UK driving conditions and in a medium-sized car, if you took it beyond 4,000 every time you changed gear, you would be driving like a total idiot. Itsmejudith (talk) 07:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...of which the UK has plenty. I remember hearing George Mangoletsi distinguishing between the sporty driver "who never gets into top gear" and the elderly lady "who never gets out of it". Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very true. Wasn't there also a couple of American tourists who hired a Mini and drove it from London to Cornwall in first gear, thinking it was an automatic? Itsmejudith (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would not surprise me a bit. On cars in America, manuals are the exception rather then the rule. Googlemeister (talk) 20:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is not one best way to operate a manual transmission. There is a margin for flexibility inherent in manually changing gears. Even if one were told the best way, one would alter it to suit one's own predilections under a variety of imposing factors. These would include one's state of mind. In an impatient frame of mind, one would be more likely to forgo good gas mileage in favor of (relatively) rapid acceleration. Bus stop (talk) 18:34, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Queen Elizabeth II and uniforms

Until 1987, Her Majesty used to ride a horse at Trooping the Colour and wore uniform. Since then, she has not risen a horse, but I'm not sure why she no longer wears uniform, does anyone know?

Also, at Royal weddings, Remembrance Day, etc, the male members of the Royal Family wear uniform, as indeed has Princess Anne on occasion. Why does the Queen wear not uniform on these occasions?

Regards, -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternative account of Phantomsteve]} 14:19, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, she's getting on a bit and was never a professional member of the armed forces, unlike (say) Prince Phillip, who was a naval officer in his own right, and Princess Anne, who's quite a bit younger. ╟─Treasury Tag►without portfolio─╢ 14:21, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't necessarily mean now, but she was only (!) in her 60s when she stopped wearing it for Trooping the Colour! Also, she served in the Auxiliary Territorial Service in World War Two -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternative account of Phantomsteve]} 14:27, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...the ATS was a voluntary institution I believe? ╟─Treasury Tag►assemblyman─╢ 14:39, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It started off that way, but became the women's branch of the Army, from what I understand -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternative account of Phantomsteve]} 14:48, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

She wasn't conscripted into it, if that's what you mean. It was a paid job, though (our article says the women serving in the ATS got 2/3 the pay of equivalent men). "Voluntary" in a military context usually means non-conscripted rather than unpaid. --Tango (talk) 14:51, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may find List of titles and honours of Queen Elizabeth II#Military ranks useful. It doesn't answer your question, though. --Tango (talk) 14:51, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

She's the Queen and can wear what she likes! --TammyMoet (talk) 15:49, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This page says: "The Queen first rode Burmese (the name of her horse) and continued to do so until 1986. Her Majesty then decided that rather than train another charger for this distinguished role she would be driven in a phaeton which had been build for Queen Victoria in 1842, and take the salutes on Horse Guards and at the Palace from a dais. The Queen no longer wears her uniforms which were essentially habits designed for wear on horseback." Alansplodge (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth joined the ATS as an honorary second subaltern in February 1945, when she was two months shy of 19. Our article notes that the service began as a volunteer organization (i.e., all members served voluntarily). The National Service Act of 1941 provided for conscription of unmarried women between 20 and 30 for service either in military bodies like the ATS, in industry, or in agriculture. The act was expanded later to cover ages 19 - 43, and to apply to married women. --- OtherDave (talk) 19:39, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Passing by the Tomb of the Unknown Warrior on the right side

At the wedding of William and Catherine, the procession passed by the Tomb of the Unknown Warrior on its right side. Why the right and not the left?BobF (talk) 16:31, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Off the top of my head, in British ceremonial, the right hand side takes precedence over the left. The most senior British regiments occupy the "right of the line" on parade - see British Army order of precedence. When both a battalion's colours are carried, the Queens Colour is on the right and the Regimental colour is on the left. Alansplodge (talk) 17:25, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In England, generally speaking, do carriages drive on the left side of the street as cars do, or do they drive on the right side? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:26, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be confused with The Cenotaph in Whitehall, London. Richard Avery (talk) 18:00, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the left. However the Tomb of the Unknown Warrior is set in the floor of Westminster Abbey by the west door. BobF means the procession of royalty, choir and clergy rather than the carriage procession. Alansplodge (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As the top of the tomb is towards the door (well at least the writing is the right way up when leaving the abbey) did they in fact go round the left hand side! MilborneOne (talk) 17:30, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can see the bridal procession (or more correctly "recession" as they're on the way out) going to the right of the tomb here at 1:07:10. Alansplodge (talk) 21:17, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that had to pass it on one side or the other. There isn't necessarily a reason. (Although, knowing that kind of event, there probably is one...) --Tango (talk) 22:56, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ther real reason is probably that someone did it that way once and its been done the same way ever since. It's hard-wired into the British mind-set to create traditions out of the most minor events; King George II once stood up by accident at the start of the Hallelujah Chorus and we've been doing the same ever since. Alansplodge (talk) 16:37, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Spanish changed their whole way of talking, forever, because of the lisp one of their monarchs of yesteryear had. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 21:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on ceceo, citing a pretty authoritative-looking discussion at Linguist List, is sceptical about the king's lisp story. --Antiquary (talk) 21:51, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, so is QI. And that's like Stephen Fry, so it must be right. Seriously though, it would be a bit weird if it were true because it's not a lisp; a long list of words aren't affected at all. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 11:12, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image production questions

I have seen pictures composed of many smaller pictures, such that these are almost like pixels—but not actually pixels as the small pictures are identifiable as figures if looked at closely. I have two questions about this technique: (i) Is there a name for this technique? and (ii) Is there any software to allow me to achieve this effect easily? Thanks.--Leon (talk) 20:10, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Photographic mosaic. Exxolon (talk) 20:33, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of photo mosaic applications and Mosaic Creator download with video tutorial (not tested). Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:36, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]