Miscellaneous desk
< February 4	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	Current desk >

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 5

Issue with the Gregorian calendar?

There is no request for information in here.

I've been studying about time, and one of the things showed to me was our real time. It seems the Gregorian calendar is incorrect. The problem with it is time. There is no account for the speed the earth is traveling around the sun, and for the sun rotation around the galactic center. This gives us a quarter of a day extra a year. Einstein explained it with his theories of relativity. Once a person reaches the speed of light, time will stop. The earth travels around and gains a quarter of a free day a year. The creator lets it build up and releases every four years on the Gregorian calendar date July the 25th. This day repeats itself. It is a day that has no time. Because we are moving slower than the speed of light we gain time. When you exceed the speed of light we can travel backwards in time. This leads to the famous "twin paradox" in which one twin is rocketed at high speeds flies across the galaxy and back home. Even at a velocity close to the speed of light, the journey would take tens of thousands of years from the vantage point of Earth, but because of his high relative motion the astronaut would age more slowly than he or she would than on Earth, and would return home only a few years older. His twin would be long dead. In a 1905 Einstein predicted that because of the rotation speed of Earth, clocks would also run slower at the Equator than the poles, but that turned out to be wrong. See Einstein actually understood time. I think with a little bit more time Einstein would have figured this out too? E=mc2 and set the speed of light, 186,000 miles per second, as the cosmic speed limit - allows for time to stop. So if you are going slower than the speed of light it will move you forward. Everyone is a time traveler on our ship earth. There are 26 hours in the day. 13 hours of light 13 hours of dark 1 hour = 52 min 1 min = 52 sec 1sec = 52 nanosec 3 times 7 = 21 + 1 for god=22 7/22 = PI PI=3.142857 364 days a year times PI = 1144 Perfect rotation!???

It appears to be all in the math. Every four years we get a free click. The day with no time. 28 days times 13 months = 364 days 12 ages/ 1 age = 2166.7 earth years 26,000 earth years around galaxy 125 years a click = 1 min on watch Remember we have to take in the account that we are moving slower than the speed of light. The faster you go towards the speed of light you gain extra time. Once you exceed the speed of light you can travel backwards in time. So all of you hopeful time travelers you will need to build a craft that can go faster than the speed of light to go back. This is almost impossible, but can be done. In order to go back you need to bend space which allows the astronaut to move faster than the speed of light. In order to bend space you need to create your own gravity? I have drawn a replica watch of earth’s correct time. I guess you can tell I ate the apple of knowledge? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.53.30.144 (talk) 18:17, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Um, no. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:33, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to disappoint you, but the fruit of knowledge that you ate seems to have been more pear-shaped. You include a few true statements, but many of your ideas are simply wrong, including the value of pi. It's not exactly 22/7 and certainly not your approximation. I find the Gregorian calendar to be surprisingly accurate. It probably won't need correcting for thousands of years. Dbfirs 23:14, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this has anything to do with relativity as such. We are in orbit around the sun, and our calendar measures that within the solar system frame of reference. If the solar system is moving at some high speed relative to the universe, it doesn't matter, because we're moving right along with it. The actual year is about 365 1/4 days, so every fourth year we add February 29 to the calendar to catch up. July 25 does not come into it. Though I'd be curious to know where you got that date from. And the day is 24 hours, not 26. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:05, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like half - remembered facts to me. Leap years were introduced by Julius Caesar, after whom July was named. He inserted his leap day immediately before February 25. 80.5.88.48 (talk) 07:32, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is claimed by the OP:

"There are 26 hours in the day. 13 hours of light 13 hours of dark 1 hour = 52 min 1 min = 52 sec 1sec = 52 nanosec 3 times 7 = 21 + 1 for god=22 7/22 = PI PI=3.142857 364 days a year times PI = 1144 Perfect rotation!???"

These are facts:

There are 24 hours in the Day. The hours of Daylight vary with latitude and season, and may occupy all, some or none of the 24. An Hour = 60 minutes = 3,600 seconds. A Nanosecond = 10⁻⁹ or ¹/_{1,000,000,000} second. The correct value of Pi is not 22/7 nor 3.142857; those are poor approximations to the actual constant Pi=3.14159265358979... where the trailing Ellipsis (triple dots) indicate the infinite continuation of the decimal expression of this irrational number. To invoke "1 for god" to force a wrong expression of pi, then multiply it with a wrong year length, and so to boast discovery of "1144 Perfect rotation!???" is the height of idiocy reached in the OP's troll post, itself a re-pasted version of the post "Understanding time" of 11:44, 22 October 2015 (UTC) that was dismissed and hatted. Blooteuth (talk) 14:59, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The OP should debate Gene Ray. —Tamfang (talk) 06:23, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tasteless wine gums

I want to make tasteless wine gums. Do I just mix gelatine with water or does it need something else to get the consistency of a wine gum? 83.239.58.162 (talk) 18:43, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This site recommends "2 packets gelatin, 1 teaspoon corn starch, 1/2 cup cold water". However, wine gums also include a lot of sugar, which will likely change the texture a bit too (although that might interfere with being flavourless). Smurrayinchester 08:43, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gelatine is not tasteless. Nor is cornflour. Nor, unless it has been distilled, is cold water. That mixture might not taste of much, but it will not be tasteless. Wymspen (talk) 10:31, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Book making cost in UK

How does the costing work out? And how long does it usually take for it to be ready? 103.230.104.21 (talk) 18:56, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean bookmaking, publishing, or book printing? If you mean publishing, the costs and timings vary enormously depending on the book's content, print run, digital options, and its target market. It's not really possible to generalize.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:10, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bookmaking is betting on the gee - gees. That's not what the OP has in mind. 80.5.88.48 (talk) 10:08, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Books can be dispensed from vending machines. The pages are printed off the internet and they are collated, glued and bound while you wait. 86.143.179.115 (talk) 12:24, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That process would fall under the umbrella of Publishing on demand or Print on demand (PoD). A number of companies offer PoD and should be easily searchable online, but the cost (and speed) will depend very much on the particular book in question – you can only find out what each will charge you by contacting them individually. Note that such companies can only sell you books to which they have bought the publishing rights: an existing book published by, for example, HarperCollins would not be available other than from HarperCollins (usually via retail outlets like online or bricks-and mortar bookshops), who may also offer a PoD service for some of their own titles, as may other 'mainstream' publishers for some of their books. (To be honest, I myself have never encountered an on-the-spot book printing vending machine, and I've been involved in book collecting, selling, and publishing for some 45 years, but I don't keep up with all the latest gimmickry.)

If you yourself have written the book in question, a PoD company will readily produce one or more copies for you, but you will have to pay extra for services like proofreading, editing and design that already-existing titles have already had done for them: these are not cheap (they require hours of work by trained staff). You are now getting into the realms of Self-publishing. There are online companies and programs that allow you to do this, but unless you have some idea of what you're doing the result can be very poor in quality (of look and content): be aware that there are many Vanity publishers who will happily "publish" as a book any material or yours you want them to, but they will charge a great deal, and some will, unfortunately, charge for things they can't and/or don't actually do, relying on their customers' ignorance: these include advertising (in a useful way) and getting books into real bookshops. You might want to consult the website of an organisation like Writer Beware, who try to monitor such abuses. [Disclosure: former "traditional" bookseller and book editor.] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195}

American Cowboy Shirt

In search of the red and black check shirt horse riders wear tucked in with denim or blue jeans. 103.230.104.21 (talk) 18:56, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I thought this would be easy. Google images has plenty of cowboys (and rodeo riders) but almost none wearing the iconic Canadian lumberjack colours. Lumberjacks wearing red and black checks aplenty but not on horses. I guess American cowboys don't want to look like lumberjacks. 196.213.35.146 (talk) 07:38, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This has more information :) O Fortuna!^{...Imperatrix mundi.} 09:22, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good news, we have plenty of actual information on this pattern! First, see tartan, that is the general conceptual term for these patterns. The black and red check is often known in the USA as "buffalo check" or "buffalo plaid". We have a redirect at buffalo plaid that send you to Clan_Gregor#Tartans, where we see it is also called MacGregor Red and Black, and it is associated with Paul Bunyan. Here is a nice article all about the Buffalo Plaid [1]. Anyway, that's where it comes from. If you want to obtain this type of shirt, just type /buffalo plaid shirt/ into google shopping, and you'll see plenty of options [2].SemanticMantis (talk) 20:09, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quadcoptor Remote Control Manual

A manual with illustration of the remote control is sought.

'Plug n Play' software sought.

103.230.104.21 (talk) 18:56, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You will have to be far more specific with the model. There are many different ones around. The plug and play is very likely to be USB support, and so also model dependent. Some are controlled over an IP network. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:21, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anne French Crème

What's the review?

Does it burn like all other hair removal products? 103.230.104.21 (talk) 18:56, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia article releant to hair removal cremes is Chemical depilatory. Here are general reviews of hair removal products [3] [4] [5] and here are reviews specific to Anne French Crème [6] [7] [8]. There are some user reports of skin irritation and it is impossible for Wikipedia to vouch for any of the linked websites or possible commercial interest behind their recommendations. Blooteuth (talk) 14:09, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The sensible procedure, with any such products you have not tried before, is to do a patch test - try it on a small area of skin somewhere usually hidden. Check if you are going to react before slathering yourself with the stuff. Wymspen (talk) 14:32, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But don't put cream up your nose. Only wax. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:17, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey IE, just for you, an important PSA about noses and what to put there/not put there :) SemanticMantis (talk) 18:17, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]