Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2011 February 2

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.

February 2

Magnetic Steel

My sharpening steel seems to be magnetic...would there be a reason for that? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 04:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

This is probably better suited for the mavens at the Science desk. Anyway, I googled [how to magnetize a screwdriver] and also looked at the magnetism article. It seems that iron-based objects can become magnetized pretty easily. I've seen it happen over time with screwdrivers that didn't start out magnetic. One of the items in that google search (replacing the last part with "steel") talked about a razor becoming magnetized over time. So my guess is it's not unusual, but I can't explain it the way the article does. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

It might have been near a magnet; lots of them in some kitchens, like refrigerator magnets and magnetic knife racks. Or it might have been near an electric motor. A piece of steel can become magnetized simply by being lined up with the Earth's magnetic field when it is struck by something. Edison (talk) 04:26, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

There was also something somewhere about creating a magnet by heating and cooling iron-based alloys. Perhaps the repetitive striking of the two objects, with resultant heat from friction, could have caused it? And might the knife itself also be magnetic now? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ferromagnetism? Most steels are magnetic, though this will depend on multiple factors. I'm sure a physicist will be able to baffle you with 'Magnetic domains', 'Spin' etc, but basically steel objects seem to line themselves up with the local field if you give them the chance. Useful sometimes, but less so if the object in question is a Battleship, and you don't want to set off magnetic mines: a degaussing coil is the solution here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Our articles on magnetism are hopeless technical, and consist almost exclusively of oblique differential equations with little explanation as to what is physically happening. To try to explain this, steel is a ferromagnetic material. In such materials, the individual crystals of the material are arranged into magnetic domains such that each crystal is itself an individual magnet. In "unmagnetized" steel, these domains are arranged randomly and they all cancel so that the bulk material has no net magnetic field. However, it is possible to induce Magnetic anisotropy in ferromagnetic materials below their Curie temperature by something called the Inverse magnetostrictive effect or Villari Effect. To reduce that to layman's terms, you can cause a ferromagnetic material (like steel) to rearrange its magnetic domains into a specific direction (anisotropy) permanently by beating the shit out of it (the Inverse magnetostrictive effect). For a repeatedly stressed piece of steel, as a sharpening steel is, over time the domains will tend to line up and form a permanent magnet. That is what is happening here. (post EC response, mostly to Edison) No, the Villari Effect doesn't actually require an external magnetic field, AFAIK. Simply placing stresses on the steel will tend to cause a spontaneous magnet to form. It can be induced to follow the direction of an external magnetic field, but other factors, such as the way that the steel was forged, will cause it as well. For example, the forging may tend to generate long, narrow crystals which have their long axes all lined up. The anisotropy as a result of the Villari effect will tend to follow this axis, even in the absense of a significant external source of magnetism. This is actually discussed at Magnetic_anisotropy#Sources_of_magnetic_anisotropy. The fact that the sharpening steel is always used in the same direction is likely enough to generate a prefered direction for the magnetic axis to line up on; and all you need to do is generate a small preference to the previously unmagnetized steel. Due to the "positive feedback" inherrant in magnets, once even a small amount of the domains begin to line up in a specific direction, the rest just follow along. --Jayron32 04:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Come on folks. It took me five seconds on Google to find dozens of links to sites that sell magnetized sharpening steels. Looie496 (talk) 04:47, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I read the question as asking "My sharpening steel became magnetized. What is the reason for this to have happened", though it is quite possible that the OP meant "I bought a magnetic sharpening steel. Why would someone have manufactured it that way". I of course answered the first question. If the OP meant the second question, it would require a different answer. So far the question seems ambiguous. --Jayron32 04:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Am I right in thinking that in the case of say a battleship, banging rivets etc into the hull, and then firing huge guns etc, would constitute 'beating the shit out of it'? This seems to have been a real issue at one time, so presumably the phenomenon was investigated? I can see how a sharpening steel could become magnetically aligned (or whatever the scientific term is), but could this really happen to the King George V? AndyTheGrump (talk)

Probably slightly, but unless there is some inherant directionality in the manufacture of the ship as a whole, probably not. That is, the entire ship is unlikely to be a giant permanent magnet because there's not much directionality (anisotropy), on a molecular level, to the way the ship is constructed. If you dragged a giant I-beam along the long axis of a battleship for days on end, I could see it happening, but given the scales involved, there's probably not enough stress in the normal construction process to generate a significant permanent magnet in the entire battleship. --Jayron32 04:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Which leads back to the question, why did they fit degaussing coils to battleships? The Royal Navy may well have been mad, but not usually when it came to spending money on wrapping ships in yards (miles?) of electric cable. I'll see if I can find a photo to illustrate the RN's obsession with degaussing His Majesty's Ships... AndyTheGrump (talk)

Because magnetic mines work like a metal detector; i.e. even if the ship isn't a permanent magnet, you can induce a magnetic field in the ship, temporarily, with any external magnetic source. The degaussers were to disrupt this induced magnetic field, not to necessarily counteract any permanent magnetic force set up in the battle ship itself. And even if the ship itself isn't magnetic, its still a large chunk of steel, which will itself alter the earth's own magnetic field in the area around the ship in profound, easily measurable ways. --Jayron32 06:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Yup, I think that makes sense. It is getting late, otherwise I'd investigate the whole magnetic mine issue further, but I think I've read somewhere that a lot of minesweepers etc are made of composites in order to avoid the problem. Of course, when Britannia first Ruled the Waves, the fleet was made of oak, and thus the problem would never have arisen. ;-) AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps someone will resolve what seem contradictory requirements. One wants to magnetize a battleship slightly so that the magnetic mine at some distance sees no disturbance to the Earth's natural field. This is a one-time treatment by a DC pulse in a cable hung around the ship, but it will need to be repeated if the ship sails to the opposite hemisphere. OTOH the ship must not have a magnetic field that interferes with its compass. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:01, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Just when they go to the other hemisphere? What happens when they turn the ship around? (e.g. sailing south vs. sailing north, but still in the same hemisphere) Wouldn't the magnetic pole of the ship no longer match the Earth's natural field? -- 174.21.236.191 (talk) 17:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Googling for magnetic "sharpening steel" finds manufacturers (e.g. [1]) who say their steels are magnetic so that they catch filings, and you don't have so much metal dust flying around. How much it helps is another matter, but that's their stated reason. 88.112.59.31 (talk) 08:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Alright, that's interesting -- thanx. So am I supposed to be wiping it down with a cloth to remove these filings from time to time? The steel article states that the steel merely hones and straightens the metal and doesn't remove anything in the first place. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 13:41, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Generally, that's correct. When you use a steel on a blade, all you're doing is bringing it back into "true" (i.e. straightening out the small bumps and dings that will build up as you use a blade), which is why sharpening steel redirects to the more correct honing steel - no real sharpening takes place. However, every time you work metal small particles can be rubbed or scraped off. Normally, those tiny particles are not a big deal and there won't be very many of them anyway, but people often like to use their steels just prior to using their blade - it's part of the show - and there's no need to rub any minute flakes of steel into your roast chicken that you don't need to. Unless... Matt Deres (talk) 15:13, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Point of fact. I vividly remember dragging incredibly heavy huge insulated cables around the Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate that I served on, for the purposes of degaussing in 1985 or so. This technique is not rare, nor related to HMS battleships and such. At the time, I wondered if the rationale was valid, but (damn) those cables were HEAVY. --Quartermaster (talk) 19:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Book publisher similar to Dover?

I remember there used to be a publisher who specialized in the same type of books that Dover publishes - a lot of 'reprints' of old books and copyright free graphics, clip art, etc. Now, everything I find is a 'Dover' book. I'm hoping that the other publisher is still in business - and if so, how I can contact them. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FancyIdeas (talk • contribs) 07:24, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure there are several such publishers. The one that first springs to my mind is Wordsworth.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Wordsworth is the one I remember from my student days, but Dalkey Archive Press[2] is one of the most prominent publishers that specialise in reprints. --Colapeninsula (talk) 12:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Another is Kessinger Publishing. Matt Deres (talk) 15:16, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Cooking/Kitchen Related Questions

1. Why should someone add meat (like ground beef) to a hot pan rather than adding it to a cold pan and then starting the heater. 2. Why should someone add cold water to a coffee maker rather than adding hot water (like hot from the tap)? Thank you in advance. --Endlessdan (talk) 15:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

If you want to sear the outside of the beef more than the inside you start with a hot pan. The high heat causes maillard reactions and caramelization which taste good. If you start with a cold pan you will overcook the beef before it has a chance to sear. Using cold water in the coffee maker lets the water extract flavor from the coffee for longer. Perhaps cold water extraction tastes better in some way than hot? Also, you may want to move this question to the science desk. Ariel. (talk) 15:51, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ariel's response is spot-on with regard to cooking meat, but I'm not sure the coffee explanation...holds water. (groan) Cofeemakers (in my experience) are designed to heat the water internally before it comes in contact with the coffee. This is definitely true of drip brew machines; all the heating takes place before the water reaches the filter full of ground coffee.

A major reason to avoid using hot water from the tap is that it tends to contain more dissolved minerals. In addition to potentially affecting the taste of the water (and any food or beverages made from it) these minerals will also contribute to the buildup of scale or lime on the inside of your coffeemaker and pot. Related to this issue is the risk of lead exposure. In older homes (and in the United States until as late as 1991) lead was frequently used in plumbing equipment as well as in solder for copper pipe. Lead is more soluble in hot water than cold, so significantly more lead can leach into the water on the hot side. Using cold water for cooking – either directly, or heated in a kettle after you've drawn it from the cold tap – avoids this risk of increased lead contamination. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:26, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

That's what I get for not drinking coffee. I don't own a coffee maker and I assumed the water/coffee mixture was heated. I quite agree (I tried to think of a water based pun but couldn't) about the tap water issue. So I assume you can heat the water in a kettle and then pour it in? Ariel. (talk) 16:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

See drip coffee. You could heat water in a kettle and pour it into the coffee-grounds-filled coffee filter, yes; this is how coffee shops like Starbucks make a customer a cup of a coffee type that they don't want to brew a whole pot for. By the way, not all coffee is made this way; when you're camping, you can indeed make coffee by heating the grounds in the kettle along with the water; in Hemingway's short story Big Two-Hearted River there was a reminiscence about an argument about this topic. Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ariel, you may be vindicated by reading about cold press coffee. Though your reasoning above does not apply to electric drip-type coffee makers, there is certainly something to the idea that cold water extraction results in a slightly different end product than typical hot water brewing. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you all for your responses. You have settled a domestic squabble. :) --Endlessdan (talk) 16:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Another reason not to put meat in a cold pan, assuming you are adding any cooking oil, is that the meat will absorb oil as it heats, but much less so if it is already hot. So putting meat in a cold pan with oil leads to greasy meat. Marco polo (talk) 16:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Now you see whenever I fill a kettle I use water from the hot tap if it's been running previously... Is there issue in that? Or am I just not normal? Mind you, apparently I'm not following the norm anyways so why stop with just hats?! hehe gazhiley.co.uk 11:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there most definitely is an issue with that. You could be exposing yourself to heavy metals. Not just lead from the pipes, but also from inside the water heater. And even a brand new water heater uses magnesium or aluminium as cathodic protection. Those aren't heavy metals, but I still wouldn't want that in my water. Ariel. (talk) 14:43, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

At least you'd die a musical death (well, it's technically music anyway).  :) -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Even worse, if the water isn't kept hot enough in the tank (or, more likely, the pipes leading from the tank to the tap), it could be a breeding ground for bacteria. It's very unwise to drink water from the hot tap. --Tango (talk) 21:16, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Then why do we use it to wash? I know we use soap or dishwasher liquid but most people rinse themselves or their dishes to get rid of the soap suds (especially themselves - no-one gets out of the shower covered in shampoo!) so surely if its that bad we should all be ill... I know someone will probably now suggest that we don't drink the water when we shower, but we have wet hands and there's no instructions not to put your hands in your mouth after showering - not that I've been told anyways... And who steralises their drinking glasses before having a drink when they've been washed? Most people I know will grab a glass from the cupboard (or the draining board if not yet returned to cupboard after washing) and drink from it without steralising first... And I can guarantee most of the times the glass would have been rinsed with water from the hot tap prior to being left to dry...gazhiley.co.uk 09:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, you might not be warned not to put your hands in your mouth straight after showering, but you are absolutely warned to dry them thoroughly before putting contact lenses in, and parents generally will warn their children not to drink the bath/shower water, nor to suck on their bath-watery hands. When you wash something, you are generally removing the dirt and grease that micro-organisms live in, not sterilising to remove the micro-organisms. When the glass dries out completely, then your micro-organisms will generally be killed. A dishwasher is different, since you can technically run it on a high enough temperature to kill things: when I worked in a hospital kitchen, the industrial dishwasher was specifically set up to do that. 86.164.58.119 (talk) 13:26, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Euro coins

Hello. I have some Euro coins but live in the UK and don't plan on visiting the eurozone. What options do I have for changing these for sterling? Most places only take notes. I'm going to Heathrow airport in a few days; does anyone there change Euro coins? Thanks, Robinh (talk) 18:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Your bank may be able to do it for you, particularly if it's part of a deposit to your account. (How much money are we talking about, here? I suspect that a lot of places will consider a pile of coins too much trouble to be worth changing.) You might also consider making an exchange with a friend, family member, or coworker who will be visiting the eurozone. Offer to repay them in euros when they buy you lunch, if you can't arrange a straight swap of currency. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for this, tenofalltrades. I have about 20 euros. Not enough to break the bank! But enough for a few beers. I'll try my bank as you suggest, but failing that I seem to remember big "put your foreign coins in here for charity" collections. Are there any of these at Heathrow? Robinh (talk) 19:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

yes but they are mostly at arrivals. Kittybrewster ☎ 19:48, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Don't you know anyone who IS planing to travel to the Eurozone soon, who might be interested in doing a trade? (My Australian daughter travelled via Heathrow to Norway recently, hence my thoughts.) HiLo48 (talk) 00:06, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Or come down to the south east, there are a few shops here that accept them. I think they are trying to sneak them over bit by bit. Or save them up, the Euro might still exist for another few years yet. 148.197.121.205 (talk) 10:28, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Keep them, you might be travelling to the Eurozone in a few years. Sidenote, I've been to the UK in 2009 and my Euros actually got accepted at a petrol station (I just wanted some biscuits and didn't have any British money on me) somewhere along the road. I thought it was nice and friendly of them. I just casually asked and they said they'll take them. --Ouro (blah blah) 12:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Why aren't there regular euro coins with the nominals 3 cent, 25 cent, 2½ euro, or 5 euro? --84.61.134.210 (talk) 14:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Probably the same reasons that there are no coins denominated 3 pence, 25 pence*, £2½ or £5* in regular circulation (coins marked * exist, but have only been issued for commemorative purposes, though they are legal tender). The lower three of these four numerical values are easily made up by 2 existing coins, and the highest is issued in banknote form. Issuing common-use coins for those values would add unnecessary complication for users and be uneconomical for issuers, though eventually inflation may see 1- and 2-cent coins withdrawn (as is beginning to happen in the Netherlands and Finland) and £/€5 coins introduced, just as happened with the old farthing, half-pence and English £1 note. I have not tried to seek documented citations of these assertions because I feel that they fall into the realm of the bleedin' obvious, but other respondents may know of some. To forestall the frequent suggestion of a 99p/c coin, this would negate one of the reasons for N.99 prices being used, which is to force shop cashiers to ring up the sale and offer the 1p/c change and the receipt, rather than taking the exact price if proffered, failing to ring it up and pocketing it. (There are of course also marketing reasons for such prices.) 87.81.230.195 (talk) 18:51, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I would note that while some places notably the US and Canada do have 25 (a quarter) cents or whatever the local name is for such a denomination and many (most?) other places where such a small quantity is worthwhile have 20 cents, I've never heard of a place having both 25 cents and 20 cents in wide and continuous circulation (i.e. not counting commerative or other short time issues or cases where a switchover is going on but the older coins were kept as legal tender). As 87 says, it seems a silly idea. I can't help wondering of the 84 knows that though. Nil Einne (talk) 00:08, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

If we're meandering down that road, I'd mention that under the old pounds, shillings and pence system (£sd), there was an set amount with a set coin called a crown, which was 5 shillings, equal to 25 new pence. But, at the same time, it was far more common to deal with and find in circulation half a crown, 2/6, two and six. So under old money, we dealt more with pieces of eight than quarters. For whatever reason, when the reform to decimal money came along, there was initially nothing between 10p (2s) and 50p (10s). In 1982, the 20p coin was brought in to fill the gap, despite previous commemorative coins in the gap having been 25p: I'm not clear on why a system of fifths was deemed better than a system of quarters, although I recall reading an interesting article on the benefits somewhere. Does anyone perhaps have a link? 86.164.58.119 (talk) 13:17, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

(OP) I happen to know that Mothercare accept euros as payment. But I don't want to buy anything that they sell (does anyone have a list of shops that accept Euros?); and I won't be visiting any eurozone countries for a long time. Thanks everyone, Robinh (talk) 16:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Does this help? Looks like you're not limited to Mothercare. Sorry, that was not a terribly good link it was old and while M&S apparently did experiment with accepting Euro notes they didn't take coins, like you have. However, I did find some sites that suggested Harrods and Selfridges will accept Euros at ordinary tills. Maybe save them for a trip to London? Karenjc 17:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Why is it not good to have both 20 cent and 25 cent coins in a single currency? --84.61.176.167 (talk) 13:34, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Why aren't there any 2, 20, or 200 yen coins? --84.61.176.167 (talk) 13:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Why weren't there any 0.20 or 0.25 DM coins? --84.61.176.167 (talk) 13:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

(Travelling) Fans in the US

Here in England I know quite a few people that are avid supporters of their local football club. So much so that they not only have a 'Season Ticket' for home games but they actually go to ALL the away games too. Now England is generally quite small and so if you're say a Leeds United fan you have to go up and down the country a fair bit, but probably nothing more than a 500 mile round trip (admittedly ~25 times a season). Now my question...do fans do this in the US? I mean if you're a fan of say, the New York Knicks you'd have to go an insane distance every season to be able to go to every home and away game...do any fans do this? ny156uk (talk) 20:18, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Undoubtedly so, but the resources required for that sort of luxury can obviously skyrocket (particularly for the leagues with longer schedules). However, it'd be far more reasonable for something like college football. For instance, if someone wanted to support my team in such fashion this past season, they'd have needed only travel to only about 3800 miles round-trip over the course of the season. — Lomn 21:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

• 1300 miles, Knoxville, Tennessee to Baton Rouge, Louisiana
• 470 miles, Knoxville to Athens, Georgia
• 530 miles, Knoxville to Columbia, South Carolina
• 780 miles, Knoxville to Memphis, Tennessee
• 360 miles, Knoxville to Nashville, Tennessee (twice) — Lomn 21:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

England's not that small if you have the misfortune to be a Plymouth Argyle supporter - a round trip to Carlisle would be 764 miles or about 13 hours drive time... -- Arwel Parry (talk) 21:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

At least you have some decent close-ish games... Us Swansea Jacks have to travel by coach for just over an hour just to visit our nearest game, and then a further 40mins past that to Bristol for our next nearest... Every away trip is at least a 4 hour round trip once you pass Scumdiff... gazhiley.co.uk 11:42, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

For a supporter of the Brisbane Lions in the Australian Football League the road trip to a single home game of the Fremantle Dockers would be an 8700 kilometre round trip (or about 5,400 miles). Not many people do it. HiLo48 (talk) 22:58, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I've been surprised when attending NFL games at the number of fans who travel to their team's away games. Even bad teams like the Detroit Lions have fans who follow the team around. I don't know if they would go to every game -- tickets for places like Lambeau Field are notoriously hard to get -- but they certainly attend several, easily spending thousands of dollars each season. You wouldn't expect to see fans traveling to all of an NBA team's away games, since NBA teams play 82 games each season, usually on weekdays. Incidentally, I read about a Dallas Cowboys season ticket holder who lives in England and flies to America eight times a year to catch the games! -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually, given a) the national appeal of the NFL and especially of certain flagship franchises like the Cowboys and b) the mobility of people in the U.S. generally, its more likely the case that there are fans of just about any team in the home cities (or close enough by) of all of the other teams. For example, I live smack-dab on the border between the markets of the Washington Redskins and the Carolina Panthers, but I am a die-hard New England Patriots fan; if I go to a Panthers where they are playing the Pats, I go as a Pats fan. And I am also not alone. There are lots of Patriots (and Browns, and Steelers, and Bears, and Cowboys, etc.) fans here in Raleigh, North Carolina and I suspect that you'll find a similar situation around the country. For the NFL at least, it may be more of a case of the team coming to the fans that drives the "away" fan base rather than fans traveling long distances. --Jayron32 04:11, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

A bit of history: some teams have a longer home base than you might imagine. North Carolina used to be hard-core Washington Redskins territory, even after the establishment of the somewhat closer Atlanta Falcons in 1965. The affiliation was strong into the 1970s, finally declining when the Carolina Panthers arrived in 1995. Part of this had to do with Sonny Jurgenson being a North Carolinian. There was a fair proportion of fans who would travel 300-400 miles to Washington for home games every couple of weeks. Acroterion _(talk) 16:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I will confirm, at least anecdotally, that the Redskins have more fans here in Raleigh than the Panthers do. Among all of my acquaintences, I don't know any that are Panthers fans first (some will root for them as a second choice), while I do know many people for whom the Redskins are the favorite team, even among those who have lived in North Carolina for their whole life. Part of the deal here is that many people resent the Panthers for taking the Redskins off of TV. When there is a TV scheduling conflict (and their frequently is), the Redskins game gets preempted by the Panthers game, and for old-school Skins fans, this is unacceptable. But I really don't know anybody here in Raleigh who is what I would call a "die hard" Panthers fan; they either aren't from Raleigh (actually describes most of the city; this is a boom town after all) and so root for their old team (like me), or if they are native they tend to root for either the Redskins or a team with more national appeal (like the Cowboys). --Jayron32 16:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Then there are places like Albuquerque, New Mexico where NFL fans can't decide if they're Dallas Cowboys or Denver Broncos fans. Corvus cornix_talk 20:30, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, much of the Desert Southwest are Cowboys fans from way back; its telling that you note that people in Albequerque don't really root for the Cardinals, which would be the most logical choice. Even people in Arizona don't often root for the Cardinals over the Cowboys. I recall that, back in the old 6-division NFL, when the Cardinals and Cowboys were both in the NFC East, the Cowboys treated their visits to Arizona as a 9th home game. --Jayron32 21:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

But there are also people who do travel around with their team. You can see the out-of-state license plates at any NFL game. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I didn't say there were none. What I said was that a sizable number of fans of the away team were residents of the metro area of the home team, in some metro areas. Of course some people travel with the team; but I don't think you can claim that the entire away fanbase is people who travelled. I wouldn't even say that, outside of the Northeast where teams are very close together, it accounts for most of them. I could easily see Giants fans traveling to Philadelphia quite easily; its quite likely that Giants fans and Eagles fans live next door to each other in much of New Jersey. But would those same Giants fans travel to, say, Jacksonville or St. Louis? Probably not. Many more of the Giants fan attendance at those games is likely local residents who are Giants fans. --Jayron32 02:00, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Try being a fan of any professional sport in Vancouver. Until the MLS Vancouver Whitecaps soccer team starts next month with Seattle 2.5 hours and a border crossing away, the closest teams to Vancouver are 13 hours drive away in Calgary and Edmonton, and most are much, much farther. Aaronite (talk) 01:48, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Top restaurants with odd closing times

Over the past few months I have tried to book a meal for a few people at a really posh restaurant, for a special occasion. On both occasions I have found that a surprising number of these places are closed at the weekends, or for some part of weekends such as Sunday lunch. Why is this? I would have thought that these are the most profitable times for them so if they had to close at some time (and with shifts I'd have thought even that isn't necessary) they would have chosen Wednesday lunchtime or something. Prokhorovka (talk) 23:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Depends on their clientele. At least in the United States, Sunday is seen as a "family" day in the restaurant trade, where you go out to eat with your family. The single/dating clientele tend to be Friday and Saturday evenings, and business clientele (e.g. take the client out to dinner) tend to be during the work week, and perhaps Saturday. An upscale restaurant catering to non-family patrons might close on Sundays as business may drop off, and especially if they want to give their employees time off to be with their families. Wednesday lunch, on the other hand, may actually be quite profitable for them, if they tend to get a large number of business executives conducting "lunch meetings". -- 140.142.20.229 (talk) 00:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

(EC) This is OR, and of course you'd have to call each individual restaurant to find their individual rationale; but I'd guess that posh restaurants that close for part of the weekend might be making most of their revenue from business lunches where executives and managers from nearby companies entertain clients; if the weekends are their least-booked times, then one of those days is the date to shut down. Although you're right that shifts should make even that unnecessary, it may be at some restaurants that there's only one owner/manager who is a control freak who doesn't want to delegate that responsibility, and they must take a break some time. Or maybe the proprietor is religious and thinks people should have the day off on Sunday. Comet Tuttle (talk) 00:40, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

It could also have to do with keeping up appearances. Let's say the restaurant has 200 seats. On Sundays, maybe they only have 100 people at a time. Besides all the costs associated with being open at all, it may be bad for the restaurant's image that there are lots of seats available, especially if it's a posh place. Sundays are also times when people like to eat breakfast/brunch type meals (eggs, bacon, etc.) which traditionally make little money for a restaurant (any money made comes from the pop and juice, if at all); if it's a posh place, that's a hard thing to incorporate into the general menu at all (though some upper-crust places do a hoity-toity expensive brunch buffet) and they'd have to deal with wait staff accustomed to dealing with a completely different style of customer. Again, it may also conflict with the image the store is trying to project. Matt Deres (talk) 14:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, thanks. Prokhorovka (talk) 09:44, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Will Chick-Fil-A ever open on Sunday? --84.61.176.167 (talk) 13:44, 4 February 2011 (UTC)