Miscellaneous desk
< June 4	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 6 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 5

Blood Hair Dye?

I'm writing this story and one character dyes his hair with blood. [I don't actually think that's possible, but hey. It's a fantasy]

Anyway, if it were possible, what colour would the hair end up? Bright red? Dark red? Brownish? Note that the character's hair starts out white. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.205.170.83 (talk) 01:04, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blood goes from dark red to brown to black as it dries, so I'd expect that having it caked into your hair would change your hair color accordingly. Note that this isn't the same as dying the hair, since the pigment remains in the red blood cells, it doesn't move into the hairs. StuRat (talk) 01:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's not possible, as you readily admit, then you can also have it go to any color you like. As you also say, it's a fantasy. Dismas|^(talk) 02:55, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Like all hair dyeing it'll depend on the hair colour. If you've ever seen a blood stain on a light fabric (typically from dark red to brown) you'll get an idea of what it's like on pale hair. On dark hair it'll have less effect. It will wash out quite quickly, since it's not a real dye (I came across some references about using animal blood with other proteins and chemicals as a primitive paint/fabric dye, but nothing very useful). --Colapeninsula (talk) 08:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If your fantasy setting uses magic, the blood could be an ingredient in a minor working or cantrip (aka "spell") whose outcome would also depend on other components of the procedure: perhaps the magical aspect of it would be the transference of the colour of the material used despite it not being a physical dye. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 84.21.143.150 (talk) 11:48, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TV Failure

I have encountered an odd issue with my TV signal. The other week a storm passed through my area, and while I was watching TV, lightning crashed nearby and my TV went black. Several seconds later, the TV was still on but it claimed there was no signal. The signal to the TV goes through an HDMI cable attached to the stereo, which is connected to the cable box. Now, when I turn on the stereo to the setting usually used to view cable TV, the audio of the channel will play on the stereo, but when I turn the TV on, the audio goes away and neither video nor audio are seen or heard, and the "NO SIGNAL" message appears again. Additionally, my PS3, which is also hooked up through an HDMI cable to the stereo, will not be viewed on the TV either.

Is the HDMI cable broken? If so, could the HDMI cable have been damaged by a power surge? Why are the other components working while the HDMI isn't? Help!
75.73.226.36 (talk) 01:50, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the component in your TV which decodes a signal from the HDMI cable is what was fried. If so, this is bad news, as a cable is much cheaper to replace than a TV (it might be possible to repair the TV, but may cost as much as the TV to do so). However, in case I am wrong, try another HDMI cable you borrow from a friend or neighbor. StuRat (talk) 02:07, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some other thoughts:

A) It's also possible that the concussion from the lightning strike just knocked the HDMI cable loose. Unplug it from both ends and plug it back in to test this theory.

B) If you have more than 1 HDMI slot on your TV, try them all.

C) If you have other types of inputs, like component or composite connectors, try those (assuming you have those type of outputs from the cable box and have, or can get, the cables). You might even try the coaxial input which normally would come from an antenna, if your cable box has a coax output.

Also, I don't quite understand your setup, so a diagram with inputs and outputs from each listed would certainly help. StuRat (talk) 02:10, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't really have the resources to draw you a diagram here, Stu :P.

But really, here's a textual representation of the setup:

Cable -> Cable Box -> HDMI in cable -> Stereo (PS3 also goes to stereo via HDMI) -> HDMI Out cable -> TV

I tried readjusting it, that didn't work; my HDMI slots are behind the TV which is attached to the wall with the wires on the other side of the wall in another room behind a large cabinet. It looks nice but if something breaks it's a real cluster-f. 75.73.226.36 (talk) 02:38, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried connecting the HDMI direct from the cable box to the TV? If this is too difficult with your configuration, try connecting the HDMI output from a laptop to the TV to find out if the fault is in the TV. Dbfirs 06:59, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the TV cable that's the problem, necessarily. Actually, I was watching movies on my PS3 when the storm hit, but it also affected the TV's ability to view cable. But yes, I will try to fix it based on these helpful hints. 75.73.226.36 (talk) 10:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, here's your configuration with some (rather basic) ASCII art:

         +-----+            +-+
         |Cable|            |S|
Cable -> | Box | -> HDMI -> |t|
         +-----+            |e|            +--+
                            |r| -> HDMI -> |TV|
          +---+             |e|            +--+
          |PS3|  -> HDMI -> |o|
          +---+             +-+

Once you've tried everything else, I think you should take your TV off the wall so you can try the other connectors. StuRat (talk) 18:09, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know an HDMI signal often uses a copy protection system with encryption? See High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection#Problems. There may be something going wrong with the handshake process when you turn on your TV, and perhaps the cable box or the stereo decided to stop sending the signal. You might try unplugging the power cable for each device (cable box, stereo, TV, and also the PS3 if it has the same problem), then plug everything back in. Maybe this will help correct any possible handshake glitch that's going on. --Bavi H (talk) 00:45, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If the above diagram is correct, I concur with others, while it's possible both your cable box and PS3 are damaged, the more likely possibility is it's just one device so the first thing to do would if at all possible try connecting either the cable box or PS3 directly to the TV. And try using 2 different HDMI cables and different input ports. At the current time it could be anything between the stereo to the TV. Nil Einne (talk) 04:02, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

selling gold jewelry

I have a gold ring I an thinking about selling. I went to one of those places that buy such things, and they said that they pay the highest price in town. I worked it out and they were paying about 62% of the current price of gold. Another place in town seemed to be paying the same. Are there places that pay closer to the actual price of gold? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 04:26, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This Consumer Reports article may have some useful information.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:37, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, so that 62% is relatively good, but it doesn't seem good enough to me. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 04:45, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that seems quite good to me. What is happening here is you're trying to sell a ring at full retail to someone who themselves needs to sell it at full retail. That isn't going to happen. For the first, the pawn shop you went to isn't going to sell the ring at 100% value because no one would by it from them, for the same reason that no one buys anything used at full value. So, the pawn shop won't get 100% value on the ring. They probably have to knock 20% off the top just to make it attractive for someone to buy. In order to make their money on buying it from you, they need to pay you even less. --Jayron32 04:58, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's also the matter of price expectation based on the headline price of gold. The ~$1,650 an ounce price is for top quality famous brand coins, not used 18K gold.DOR (HK) (talk) 06:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They take into account that it is 18K gold, not pure gold. And this is just the price of the gold in it. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 17:03, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you try and sell it direct to a customer on eBay or some local small ads site, you may get more money for it than if you try and sell it to someone who is going to try and sell it on themselves. --Viennese Waltz 07:28, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If the OP was in the UK I'd be advising him to go to the Jewellery Quarter of Birmingham, which (as its name implies) is where they make jewellery. There's been agents buying and selling gold jewellery there for centuries, and they give the best prices. It's such places the OP needs to seek out in his location. That is, somewhere that makes jewellery and is used to buying wholesale (as opposed to retail). --TammyMoet (talk) 07:41, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Beware that unscrupulous dealers may try to cheat you by saying the weight and/or purity are lower than they really are. Get multiple appraisals. StuRat (talk) 10:56, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but this not a pawn shop and it is a local company that I've dealt with before (with other things). Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 17:03, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was in the exact situation a few years back, and I was quoted 50% of the gold price. I thought asking for more appraisals probably won't get it higher than 60% so I just gave up and threw up an auction on eBay. To my great surprise two weeks later when the auction ended, it was only a few dollars below the price of gold. Though the eBay method comes with the catch that you must have an account that's a few years old, have perfect rating, and lot of feedbacks.Anonymous.translator (talk) 11:44, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Asian Gold

Numerous establishments in and around the above Jewellery Quarter advertise that they are keen to buy "Gold, Silver, and Asian Gold". No amount of Googling has revealed to me the nature of Asian Gold. Does this just mean Asian gold jewellery? In which case why not just "gold"? Or is Asian Gold some particular type of gold?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:07, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If gold is imported into the UK it doesn't need to go through our assay process, until it is sold. Asian gold is typically of a different quality to UK produced gold jewellery. I'll get some references shortly. --TammyMoet (talk) 12:30, 5 June 2012 (UTC) Here's a story about an Asian jeweller prosecuted for selling gold without hallmarks. --TammyMoet (talk) 12:35, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many Asians, I assume, bring their gold with them to the UK, or buy it in India. This is not hallmarked to UK standards and thus I don't think you'll get as much for it since it can't be sold by dealers. They're saying they'll be competitive in prices for this. Presumably they melt it down most of the time. Any interesting pieces can be sold privately.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:52, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe SEA, East Asians and South Asians tend to prefer higher purity gold generally 21, 22 or even 24 carat which is yellower and softer compared to that preferred in the West (I believe 18 karat is generally the highest in common use it's often less depending on type of product) which may be what Tammy is thinking about. Our article discusses this briefly. This ref [1] also seems to support the claim and mentions Arab countries as another place where higher purity gold jewelry is common whch our article also supports so i guess it's throughout a fair amount of Asia. Nil Einne (talk) 14:45, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Small peninsula jutting out into Lake Michigan in Indiana near Chicago

Does this peninsula have a name? What is on it? [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.156.136.229 (talk) 15:00, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Inland Steel Company. --LarryMac | Talk 15:09, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Error in Michael Pakenham Edgeworth biography

I believe there is an error in Michael Pakenham Edgeworth's biography.

According the the article: "{Michael's} half-sister, born to Honora Edgeworth, was the novelist Maria Edgeworth."

However, according to the biographies of Maria Edgeworth and her father, Richard Lovell Edgeworth, Maria's mother was Anna Maria Edgeworth.

Onthesolidrock (talk) 15:43, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you have the references to back it up, feel free to make the change. Mingmingla (talk) 17:01, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source, so you cannot use those articles to support your change. The statement in Maria Edgeworth is not referenced, but that in Richard Lovell Edgeworth is referenced, to the peerage.com, which I presume is a reliable source; so you can make the change and use that as a reference. (If you are feeling public-spirited, you could add the same reference to Maria Edgeworth.) --ColinFine (talk) 19:43, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]