Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science and Talk:Northeast Regional: Difference between pages

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Reference desk
(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
 
Tlantanu (talk | contribs)
2,080 edits
there's a map
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{TrainsWikiProject|class=start|Passenger=yes|Mapneeded=no}}
[[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed]]{{Wikipedia:Reference desk/header|WP:RD/S}}


I put in a map, but it has since spaced itself out. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Tlantanu|Tlantanu]] ([[User talk:Tlantanu|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Tlantanu|contribs]]) 22:48, 5 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2008 May 25}}


==Train numbers==
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2008 May 26}}
''[[Turboservice (Amtrak)|Turboservice]]'' was 3001/3002
''[[Turbo (Amtrak)|Turbo]]'' last ran 4-28-1973
{| class="wikitable"
!#
!freq
!from
!to
!former name
!notes
![http://groups.google.com/group/bit.listserv.railroad/msg/71c75eb00db0da08?hl=en 11-14-1971 name]
![http://groups.google.com/group/misc.transport.rail.americas/browse_frm/thread/d9bdf4b37964b44d/5bb2ed5ed8f0309b?lnk=st&q=amtrak+colonial+%22newport+news%22&rnum=4&hl=en#5bb2ed5ed8f0309b 1988-89 name]
|-
|12
|
|||
|
|gone
|
|''[[Fast Mail (Amtrak)|Fast Mail]]'' WAS-BOS
|-
|19
|
|||
|
|gone
|
|''[[Crescent (Amtrak)|Crescent]]'' NYP-WAS
|-
|20
|
|||
|
|gone
|
|''[[Crescent (Amtrak)|Crescent]]'' WAS-NYP
|-
|40
|
|||
|
|gone
|''[[Broadway Limited (Amtrak)|Broadway Limited]]'' PHL-NYP
|''[[Broadway Limited (Amtrak)|Broadway Limited]]'' PHL-NYP
|-
|41
|
|||
|
|gone
|''[[Broadway Limited (Amtrak)|Broadway Limited]]'' NYP-PHL
|''[[Broadway Limited (Amtrak)|Broadway Limited]]'' NYP-PHL
|-
|42
|M-Sa
|PHL||NYP
|
|
|''[[Keystone (Amtrak)|Keystone]]'' PHL-NYP
|''[[Valley Forge (Amtrak)|Valley Forge]]'' PHL-NYP
|-
|43
|7D
|NYP||PHL
|''[[Pennsylvanian (Amtrak)|Pennsylvanian]]''
|
|''[[Keystone (Amtrak)|Keystone]]'' NYP-PHL
|''[[Valley Forge (Amtrak)|Valley Forge]]'' NYP-PHL
|-
|44
|Su
|PHL||NYP
|''[[Pennsylvanian (Amtrak)|Pennsylvanian]]''
|
|
|''[[Big Apple (Amtrak)|Big Apple]]'' PHL-NYP
|-
|45
|
|||
|
|gone
|
|''[[Susquehanna (Amtrak)|Susquehanna]]'' NYP-PHL
|-
|46
|
|||
|
|gone
|
|''[[Pennsylvania (Amtrak)|Pennsylvania]]'' PHL-NYP
|-
|47
|
|||
|
|gone
|
|''[[Pennsylvania (Amtrak)|Pennsylvania]]'' NYP-PHL
|-
|50
|
|||
|
|gone
|''[[George Washington (Amtrak)|George Washington]]'' WAS-BOS
|''[[Cardinal (Amtrak)|Cardinal]]'' WAS-NYP
|-
|51
|
|||
|
|gone
|''[[James Whitcomb Riley (Amtrak)|James Whitcomb Riley]]'' BOS-WAS
|''[[Cardinal (Amtrak)|Cardinal]]'' NYP-WAS
|-
|54
|WE
|WAS||SPG
|-
|55
|WD
|SPG||WAS
|''[[Vermonter (Amtrak)|Vermonter]]''
|-
|56
|WD
|WAS||SPG
|''[[Vermonter (Amtrak)|Vermonter]]''
|-
|57
|WE
|SPG||WAS
|-
|66
|7D
|NPN||BOS
|''[[Twilight Shoreliner (Amtrak)|Twilight Shoreliner]]''
|
|
|''[[Night Owl (Amtrak)|Night Owl]]'' WAS-BOS
|-
|67
|7D
|BOS||NPN
|''[[Twilight Shoreliner (Amtrak)|Twilight Shoreliner]]''
|
|
|''[[Night Owl (Amtrak)|Night Owl]]'' BOS-WAS
|-
|75
|
|||
|''[[James River (Amtrak)|James River]]''
|gone<br>New York-Buffalo on 11-14-1971
|-
|76
|Su
|RVR||BOS
|''[[Weekend Twilight Shoreliner (Amtrak)|Weekend Twilight Shoreliner]]''
|-
|78
|F
|NPN||RVR
|''[[James River (Amtrak)|James River]]''
|-
|79
|7D
|NYP||RVR
|''[[Carolinian (Amtrak)|Carolinian]]''
|''[[Carolinian (Amtrak)|Carolinian]]''
|-
|80
|7D
|RVR||NYP
|''[[Carolinian (Amtrak)|Carolinian]]''
|''[[Carolinian (Amtrak)|Carolinian]]''
|-
|81
|
|||
|
|gone
|''[[Silver Star (Amtrak)|Silver Star]]'' NYP-RVR
|''[[Silver Star (Amtrak)|Silver Star]]'' NYP-RVR
|-
|82
|Sa
|RVR||BOS
|
|
|''[[Silver Star (Amtrak)|Silver Star]]'' RVR-NYP
|''[[Silver Star (Amtrak)|Silver Star]]'' RVR-NYP
|-
|83
|F
|BOS||NPN
|
|
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]'' NYP-RVR
|-
|84
|WD
|RVR||WAS
|''[[Virginian (Amtrak)|Virginian]]''
|
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]'' RVR-NYP
|-
|85
|WD
|NYP||RVR
|''[[Charter Oak (Amtrak)|Charter Oak]]''
|
|''[[Champion (Amtrak)|Champion]]'' NYP-RVR
|''[[Virginian (Amtrak)|Virginian]]'' NYP-RVR
|-
|86
|WD
|RVR||BOS
|''[[Charter Oak (Amtrak)|Charter Oak]]''
|
|''[[Champion (Amtrak)|Champion]]''? RVR-NYP
|''[[Virginian (Amtrak)|Virginian]]'' RVR-NYP
|-
|87
|Su
|NYP||RVR
|
|
|
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]'' NYP-RVR
|-
|88
|Sa
|RVR||BOS
|
|
|
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]'' RVR-NYP
|-
|89
|7D
|NYP||RVR
|''[[Silver Palm (Amtrak)|Silver Palm]]''
|''[[Palmetto (Amtrak)|Palmetto]]''
|
|''[[Palmetto (Amtrak)|Palmetto]]'' NYP-RVR
|-
|90
|7D
|RVR||NYP
|''[[Silver Palm (Amtrak)|Silver Palm]]''
|''[[Palmetto (Amtrak)|Palmetto]]''
|
|''[[Palmetto (Amtrak)|Palmetto]]'' RVR-NYP
|-
|91
|7D
|NYP||RVR
|''[[Silver Star (Amtrak)|Silver Star]]''
|''[[Silver Star (Amtrak)|Silver Star]]''
|
|''[[Silver Star (Amtrak)|Silver Star]]'' NYP-RVR
|-
|92
|7D
|RVR||NYP
|''[[Silver Star (Amtrak)|Silver Star]]''
|''[[Silver Star (Amtrak)|Silver Star]]''
|
|''[[Silver Star (Amtrak)|Silver Star]]'' RVR-NYP
|-
|93
|M-R
|BOS||RVR
|''[[Virginian (Amtrak)|Virginian]]''
|-
|94
|WD
|NPN||BOS
|''[[Old Dominion (Amtrak)|Old Dominion]]''
|
|
|''[[Colonial (Amtrak)|Colonial]]'' NPN-BOS
|-
|95
|WD
|BOS||NPN
|''[[Old Dominion (Amtrak)|Old Dominion]]''
|
|
|''[[Colonial (Amtrak)|Colonial]]'' BOS-NPN
|-
|96
|
|||
|''[[Tidewater (Amtrak)|Tidewater]]''
|gone
|
|''[[Tidewater (Amtrak)|Tidewater]]'' NPN-NYP
|-
|97
|7D
|NYP||RVR
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]''
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]''
|
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]'' NYP-RVR
|-
|98
|7D
|RVR||NYP
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]''
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]''
|
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]'' RVR-NYP
|-
|99
|WE
|BOS||NPN
|''[[Virginian (Amtrak)|Virginian]]''
|-
|111
|WD
|NYP||WAS
|''[[Metroliner (Amtrak)|Metroliner]]''
|-
|121
|Sa
|NYP||WAS
|''[[Metroliner (Amtrak)|Metroliner]]''
|-
|125
|WD
|NYP||WAS
|''[[Metroliner (Amtrak)|Metroliner]]''
|-
|126
|
|||
|''[[Legislator (Amtrak)|Legislator]]''<br>''[[Metroliner (Amtrak)|Metroliner]]''
|gone
|-
|127
|WD
|NYP||WAS
|-
|129
|WD
|NYP||WAS
|-
|130
|WD
|WAS||NYP
|
|
|''[[Free State (Amtrak)|Free State]]'' WAS-NYP
|-
|131
|WE
|NYP||WAS
|
|
|''[[Congressional (Amtrak)|Congressional]]'' NYP-WAS
|-
|132
|WD
|WAS||NYP
|''[[Representative (Amtrak)|Representative]]''
|
|''[[Nightcap (Amtrak)|Nightcap]]'' WAS-NYP
|-
|133
|
|||
|''[[President (Amtrak)|President]]''
|gone
|''[[Free State (Amtrak)|Free State]]'' NYP-WAS
|-
|135
|WE
|BOS||WAS
|
|
|''[[Nightcap (Amtrak)|Nightcap]]'' NYP-WAS
|''[[Potomac (Amtrak)|Potomac]]'' NYP-WAS
|-
|136
|F
|WAS||SPG
|-
|137
|WD
|BOS||WAS
|''[[Midday Congressional (Amtrak)|Midday Congressional]]''
|
|
|''[[Embassy (Amtrak)|Embassy]]'' NYP-WAS
|-
|138
|WD
|WAS||NYP
|
|
|
|''[[Verrazano (Amtrak)|Verrazano]]'' WAS-NYP
|-
|139
|
|||
|''[[Mount Vernon (Amtrak)|Mount Vernon]]''
|-
|140
|WE
|WAS||BOS
|
|
|''[[Bay State (Amtrak)|Bay State]]'' WAS-BOS
|''[[Potomac (Amtrak)|Potomac]]'' WAS-SPG
|-
|141
|WD
|BOS||WAS
|''[[Florida Special (Amtrak)|Florida Special]]''<br>''[[Bankers (Amtrak)|Bankers]]''
|
|''[[Connecticut Yankee (Amtrak)|Connecticut Yankee]]'' SPG-NYP
|''[[Bankers (Amtrak)|Bankers]]'' SPG-WAS
|-
|142
|
|||
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]''<br>|''[[Bay State (Amtrak)|Bay State]]''
|gone
|''[[Charter Oak (Amtrak)|Charter Oak]]'' WAS-SPG
|-
|143
|WE
|BOS||WAS
|''[[Silver Meteor (Amtrak)|Silver Meteor]]''<br>''[[Nutmeg State (Amtrak)|Nutmeg State]]''
|
|''[[Charter Oak (Amtrak)|Charter Oak]]'' SPG-WAS
|''[[Connecticut Yankee (Amtrak)|Connecticut Yankee]]'' SPG-WAS
|-
|144
|
|||
|''[[Champion (Amtrak)|Champion]]''
|gone
|''[[Connecticut Yankee (Amtrak)|Connecticut Yankee]]'' WAS-SPG
|-
|145
|WE
|SPG||WAS
|''[[Champion (Amtrak)|Champion]]''<br>''[[Bay State (Amtrak)|Bay State]]''
|
|''[[Bay State (Amtrak)|Bay State]]'' BOS-WAS
|-
|146
|Sa
|WAS||SPG
|''[[Florida Special (Amtrak)|Florida Special]]''
|-
|148
|WD
|WAS||BOS
|''[[Bankers (Amtrak)|Bankers]]''
|
|
|''[[Connecticut Yankee (Amtrak)|Connecticut Yankee]]'' WAS-SPG
|-
|150
|WE
|WAS||BOS
|''[[Big Apple (Amtrak)|Big Apple]]''
|
|''[[Yankee Clipper (Amtrak)|Yankee Clipper]]'' NYP-BOS
|-
|151
|WD
|PHL||WAS
|''[[Liberty Bell (Amtrak)|Liberty Bell]]''
|
|''[[Yankee Clipper (Amtrak)|Yankee Clipper]]'' BOS-NYP
|-
|152
|WE
|WAS||NYP
|''[[Afternoon Congressional (Amtrak)|Afternoon Congressional]]''
|-
|153
|WE
|NYP||WAS
|-
|154
|Su
|WAS||NYP
|-
|155
|WE
|NYP||WAS
|''[[Embassy (Amtrak)|Embassy]]''
|-
|156
|WE
|WAS||NYP
|-
|157
|WE
|NYP||WAS
|-
|158
|WE
|WAS||NYP
|-
|159
|WE
|NYP||WAS
|''[[Capital Sunrise (Amtrak)|Capital Sunrise]]''
|-
|160
|WE
|WAS||BOS
|
|
|''[[East Wind (Amtrak)|East Wind]]'' NYP-BOS
|-
|161
|WE
|BOS||WAS
|
|
|''[[East Wind (Amtrak)|East Wind]]'' BOS-NYP
|''[[Patriot (Amtrak)|Patriot]]'' BOS-WAS
|-
|162
|WE
|WAS||BOS
|
|
|''[[Narragansett (Amtrak)|Narragansett]]'' NYP-BOS
|-
|163
|WE
|BOS||WAS
|''[[Minute Man (Amtrak)|Minute Man]]''
|
|''[[Narragansett (Amtrak)|Narragansett]]'' BOS-NYP
|-
|164
|WE
|WAS||BOS
|''[[Narragansett (Amtrak)|Narragansett]]''
|-
|165
|WE
|BOS||WAS
|
|
|''[[Patriot (Amtrak)|Patriot]]'' BOS-NYP
|-
|166
|Su
|WAS||BOS
|''[[Mount Vernon (Amtrak)|Mount Vernon]]''
|-
|167
|WE
|BOS||WAS
|''[[Narragansett (Amtrak)|Narragansett]]''
|
|
|''[[Mount Vernon (Amtrak)|Mount Vernon]]'' BOS-WAS
|-
|168
|WE
|WAS||BOS
|
|
|
|''[[Narragansett (Amtrak)|Narragansett]]'' WAS-BOS
|-
|169
|F
|BOS||WAS
|''[[Evening Metropolitan (Amtrak)|Evening Metropolitan]]''
|
|
|''[[Senator (Amtrak)|Senator]]'' BOS-WAS
|-
|170
|WD
|WAS||BOS
|''[[Colonial (Amtrak)|Colonial]]''<br>''[[Patriot (Amtrak)|Patriot]]''
|
|''[[Bunker Hill (Amtrak)|Bunker Hill]]'' WAS-BOS
|''[[Yankee Clipper (Amtrak)|Yankee Clipper]]'' WAS-BOS
|-
|171
|WD
|BOS||WAS
|''[[Colonial (Amtrak)|Colonial]]''<br>''[[Mayflower (Amtrak)|Mayflower]]''
|
|''[[Southern Crescent (Amtrak)|Southern Crescent]]'' BOS-WAS
|-
|172
|WD
|WAS||BOS
|''[[Senator (Amtrak)|Senator]]''<br>''[[Mayflower (Amtrak)|Mayflower]]''
|
|''[[Southern Crescent (Amtrak)|Southern Crescent]]'' WAS-BOS
|-
|173
|WD
|BOS||WAS
|''[[Senator (Amtrak)|Senator]]''<br>''[[Yankee Clipper (Amtrak)|Yankee Clipper]]''
|
|''[[Colonial (Amtrak)|Colonial]]'' BOS-WAS last ran 4-28-1973
|''[[Yankee Clipper (Amtrak)|Yankee Clipper]]'' BOS-WAS
|-
|174
|WD
|WAS||BOS
|''[[Patriot (Amtrak)|Patriot]]''<br>''[[Yankee Clipper (Amtrak)|Yankee Clipper]]''
|
|''[[Colonial (Amtrak)|Colonial]]'' WAS-BOS last ran 4-28-1973
|''[[Minute Man (Amtrak)|Minute Man]]'' WAS-BOS
|-
|175
|WD
|BOS||WAS
|''[[Patriot (Amtrak)|Patriot]]''
|
|''[[Senator (Amtrak)|Senator]]'' BOS-WAS
|''[[Minute Man (Amtrak)|Minute Man]]'' BOS-WAS
|-
|176
|WD
|WAS||BOS
|''[[Merchants Limited (Amtrak)|Merchants Limited]]''
|
|''[[Patriot (Amtrak)|Patriot]]'' WAS-BOS
|''[[Senator (Amtrak)|Senator]]'' WAS-BOS
|-
|177
|WD
|BOS||WAS
|''[[Senator (Amtrak)|Senator]]''
|
|''[[Merchants Limited (Amtrak)|Merchants Limited]]'' BOS-WAS
|''[[Merchants Limited (Amtrak)|Merchants Limited]]'' BOS-WAS
|-
|178
|WD
|WAS||BOS
|''[[Concord (Amtrak)|Concord]]''
|
|''[[Senator (Amtrak)|Senator]]'' WAS-BOS
|''[[Merchants Limited (Amtrak)|Merchants Limited]]'' WAS-BOS
|-
|179
|M-R
|BOS||PHL
|''[[Evening Metropolitan (Amtrak)|Evening Metropolitan]]''
|
|
|''[[Mount Vernon (Amtrak)|Mount Vernon]]'' WAS-BOS
|-
|180
|WD
|WAS||NYP
|''[[Bostonian (Amtrak)|Bostonian]]''<br>''[[Wall Street (Amtrak)|Wall Street]]''
|
|''[[Merchants Limited (Amtrak)|Merchants Limited]]'' PHL-BOS
|''[[First State (Amtrak)|First State]]'' WAS-NYP
|-
|181
|WD
|NYP||WAS
|''[[New Yorker (Amtrak)|New Yorker]]''<br>''[[Congressional (Amtrak)|Congressional]]''
|
|''[[Valley Forge (Amtrak)|Valley Forge]]'' BOS-PHL
|''[[Garden State Special (Amtrak)|Garden State Special]]'' NYP-WAS
|-
|182
|WE
|WAS||NYP
|''[[Bay State (Amtrak)|Bay State]]''<br>''[[Chesapeake (Amtrak)|Chesapeake]]''
|
|unnamed PHL-NYP
|''[[Congressional (Amtrak)|Congressional]]'' WAS-NYP
|-
|183
|WD
|NYP||WAS
|''[[Manhattan (Amtrak)|Manhattan]]''<br>''[[Foggy Bottom (Amtrak)|Foggy Bottom]]''
|
|
|''[[Independece (Amtrak)|Independece]]'' NYP-WAS
|-
|184
|WD
|WAS||NYP
|''[[Yankee Clipper (Amtrak)|Yankee Clipper]]''<br>''[[New Yorker (Amtrak)|New Yorker]]''
|-
|185
|WD
|NYP||WAS
|''[[Merchants Limited (Amtrak)|Merchants Limited]]''<br>''[[Mount Vernon (Amtrak)|Mount Vernon]]''
|
|
|''[[Congressional (Amtrak)|Congressional]]'' NYP-WAS
|-
|186
|WD
|WAS||NYP
|''[[Merchants Limited (Amtrak)|Merchants Limited]]''<br>''[[Times Square (Amtrak)|Times Square]]''
|
|
|''[[Garden State Special (Amtrak)|Garden State Special]]'' WAS-NYP
|-
|187
|WD
|NYP||WAS
|''[[Murray Hill (Amtrak)|Murray Hill]]''<br>''[[Capitol Hill (Amtrak)|Capitol Hill]]''
|
|
|''[[Jeffersonian (Amtrak)|Jeffersonian]]'' NYP-WAS
|-
|188
|WD
|WAS||NYP
|
|
|
|''[[Embassy (Amtrak)|Embassy]]'' WAS-NYP
|-
|189
|
|||
|''[[Georgetown (Amtrak)|Georgetown]]''
|gone
|-
|190
|WD
|WAS||BOS
|''[[Congressional (Amtrak)|Congressional]]''
|-
|191
|Su
|PHL||WAS
|''[[Embassy (Amtrak)|Embassy]]''
|-
|192
|WE
|WAS||NYP
|-
|193
|WD
|NYP||WAS
|''[[Potomac (Amtrak)|Potomac]]''
|-
|194
|WE
|NPN||BOS
|''[[Gotham Limited (Amtrak)|Gotham Limited]]''
|-
|195
|WE
|BOS||RVR
|''[[Tidewater (Amtrak)|Tidewater]]''
|-
|196
|M-R
|WAS||NYP
|''[[Merchants Limited (Amtrak)|Merchants Limited]]''<br>''[[Capitol Hill (Amtrak)|Capitol Hill]]''
|-
|197
|WE
|BOS||PHL
|
|
|
|''[[Benjamin Franklin (Amtrak)|Benjamin Franklin]]'' BOS-PHL
|-
|198
|7D
|WAS||NYP
|''[[Bowery (Amtrak)|Bowery]]''
|
|
|''[[Benjamin Franklin (Amtrak)|Benjamin Franklin]]'' PHL-BOS
|-
|199
|Sa
|NYP||WAS
|''[[Capitol Hill (Amtrak)|Capitol Hill]]''
|-
|406
|Su
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 76
|-
|412
|
|||
|''[[Fast Mail (Amtrak)|Fast Mail]]''
|gone
|-
|414
|WE
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 194
|-
|418
|WD
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 148
|-
|441
|WD
|SPG||NHV
|
|shuttle to 141
|-
|443
|WE
|SPG||NHV
|
|shuttle to 143
|-
|450
|WE
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 150
|-
|460
|WE
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 160
|-
|461
|WE
|SPG||NHV
|
|shuttle to 161
|-
|463
|WE
|SPG||NHV
|
|shuttle to 163
|-
|464
|WE
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 164
|-
|465
|WE
|SPG||NHV
|
|shuttle to 165
|-
|466
|Su
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 166
|-
|467
|WE
|SPG||NHV
|
|shuttle to 167
|-
|468
|WE
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 168
|-
|470
|WD
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 170
|-
|471
|WD
|SPG||NHV
|''[[Mayflower (Amtrak)|Mayflower]]''
|shuttle to 171
|-
|472
|WD
|NHV||SPG
|''[[Mayflower (Amtrak)|Mayflower]]''
|shuttle from 172
|-
|473
|WD
|SPG||NHV
|
|shuttle to 173
|-
|475
|WD
|SPG||NHV
|''[[Patriot (Amtrak)|Patriot]]''
|shuttle to 175
|-
|476
|WD
|NHV||SPG
|''[[Merchants Limited (Amtrak)|Merchants Limited]]''
|shuttle from 176
|-
|477
|WD
|SPG||NHV
|''[[Senator (Amtrak)|Senator]]''
|shuttle to 177
|-
|486
|WD
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 86
|-
|488
|Sa
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 88
|-
|490
|WD
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 190
|-
|491
|WE
|SPG||NHV
|
|shuttle to 195
|-
|493
|WD
|SPG||NHV
|
|shuttle to 93/83
|-
|494
|WD
|NHV||SPG
|
|shuttle from 94
|-
|495
|WD
|SPG||NHV
|
|shuttle to 95
|-
|497
|Su
|SPG||NHV
|
|shuttle to 197
|-
|624
|WD
|PHL||NYP
|-
|629
|WD
|NYP||PHL
|-
|630
|WD
|PHL||NYP
|-
|633
|WD
|NYP||PHL
|-
|637
|Su
|NYP||PHL
|''[[Benjamin Franklin (Amtrak)|Benjamin Franklin]]''
|-
|638
|
|||
|''[[Benjamin Franklin (Amtrak)|Benjamin Franklin]]''
|gone
|-
|639
|Su-F
|NYP||PHL
|''[[Liberty Bell (Amtrak)|Liberty Bell]]''
|-
|640
|WD
|PHL||NYP
|-
|641
|WD
|NYP||PHL
|-
|642
|WD
|PHL||NYP
|-
|643
|WE
|NYP||PHL
|-
|644
|WE
|PHL||NYP
|-
|645
|WD
|NYP||PHL
|-
|646
|WD
|PHL||NYP
|-
|647
|WD
|NYP||PHL
|-
|648
|WD
|PHL||NYP
|-
|649
|WD
|NYP||PHL
|-
|650
|Su
|PHL||NYP
|-
|651
|WE
|NYP||PHL
|-
|652
|WD
|PHL||NYP
|-
|654
|WE
|PHL||NYP
|-
|655
|WD
|NYP||PHL
|-
|656
|WD
|PHL||NYP
|-
|657
|Su
|NYP||PHL
|-
|658
|WD
|PHL||NYP
|-
|659
|Su
|NYP||PHL
|-
|660
|WE
|PHL||NYP
|-
|661
|Su
|NYP||PHL
|
|continues to Harrisburg
|-
|662
|WE
|PHL||NYP
|-
|663
|Sa
|NYP||PHL
|-
|665
|WD
|NYP||PHL
|}


==Metroliners==
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2008 May 27}}
{| class="wikitable"
!#
!freq
!from
!to
!former name
!notes
|-
|2103
|WD
|NYP||WAS
|}


== Oppose splitting off of Virginia service, NHV-SPG service ==
= May 28 =


This article is on Amtrak's ''Regional''. It should cover the entire service, all endpoints to all endpoints. --[[User:CComMack|CComMack]] 02:40, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
== Can you make black holes move? ==


If you throw something at it... Like the sun, and throw it hard. Like 99.99% the speed of light, what will it do to the black hole? Will it affect the black hole's velocity? [[Special:Contributions/65.41.92.123|65.41.92.123]] ([[User talk:65.41.92.123|talk]]) 00:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


== Name Change ==
:Yes, it would work the same way as any other object, assuming the other object would be able to absorb a star. In fact, absorbing any object would make it move, just more slowly. See [[conservation of momentum]]. [[User:*Max*|*Max*]] ([[User talk:*Max*|talk]]) 00:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Are we absolutely sure about the name change or could it just be a clarification in the timetable?

:A [[gravitational tractor]] would likely be the most reliable way to move a black hole. (Although given the likely masses involved, it would take a long time and a lot of energy.) -- [[Special:Contributions/128.104.112.147|128.104.112.147]] ([[User talk:128.104.112.147|talk]]) 01:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
While it is in the timetable, the Amtrak website doesn't make any mention of the new name and there has not been a press release. --[[Special:Contributions/69.123.112.18|69.123.112.18]] ([[User talk:69.123.112.18|talk]]) 21:31, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
* There are no other trains anywhere in the Amtrak system. There's nothing to clarify. A lot of things will probably still refer to the train as simply a ''Regional'', but it seems the official name is now ''Northeast Regional''. I don't think any press release has to be made about such a small name change either. [[User:Murjax|Murjax]] ([[User talk:Murjax|talk]]) 21:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

== Magnetic Moment ==

In [[dipole]], two equasions for the [[magnetic field]] are given; one describes it as a [[scalar]], the other as a [[vector]]. They are
:<math>B(\mathbf{r}, \lambda) = \frac {\mu_0} {4\pi} \frac {\mathbf{m}} {r^3} \sqrt {1+3\sin^2\lambda}</math>
and
:<math>\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{r}) = \frac {\mu_0} {4\pi r^3} \left(3(\mathbf{m}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{r}})\hat{\mathbf{r}}-\mathbf{m}\right) + \frac{2\mu_0}{3}\mathbf{m}\delta^3(\mathbf{r})</math>
Setting them equal,
:<math>\frac {\mu_0} {4\pi} \frac {\mathbf{m}} {r^3} \sqrt {1+3\sin^2\lambda} = |\frac {\mu_0} {4\pi r^3} \left(3(\mathbf{m}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{r}})\hat{\mathbf{r}}-\mathbf{m}\right) + \frac{2\mu_0}{3}\mathbf{m}\delta^3(\mathbf{r})|</math>
Dividing by common stuff and since the [[Dirac delta]] will gives zero,
:<math>{\mathbf{m}} \sqrt {1+3\sin^2\lambda} = |\left(3(\mathbf{m}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{r}})\hat{\mathbf{r}}-\mathbf{m}\right)|</math>
Now, <math>\mathbf{m} = (1, 0, 0)</math> and <math>\mathbf{r} = (\frac {\sqrt {3}} {3}, \frac {\sqrt {3}} {3}, \frac {\sqrt {3}} {3})</math>, so <math>\lambda = \arctan \sqrt2</math>. But,
:<math>1 \sqrt {1 + \frac {2} {3}} = |\left(3(\frac {\sqrt 3} {3})\hat{(\frac {\sqrt 3} {3}, \frac {\sqrt 3} {3}, \frac {\sqrt 3} {3})}-(1, 0, 0)\right)|</math>
:<math>\sqrt {\frac {5} {3}} = |\left((1, 1, 1)-(1, 0, 0)\right)</math>
:<math>\sqrt {\frac {5} {3}} = |(0, 1, 1)|</math>
:<math>\sqrt {\frac {5} {3}} = \sqrt 2</math>
These are not equal. Am I doing something wrong or is one formula wrong? Thanks [[User:*Max*|*Max*]] ([[User talk:*Max*|talk]]) 00:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC).
:Isn't <math>\lambda </math> a function of r. For your example r , <math>\lambda = \arctan (1)</math> or 45°. [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 02:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Second equation is the one I remember since undergrad, it is correct. The first one, as you say quite correctly, gives B as a scalar, that is, gives an absolute value of B. Therefore, m should not be boldfaced in that equation. Now, as you know, absolute value of a vector is a square root of sum of squares of its orthogonal components. Let us take z-axis along '''m''' and x-axis in ('''m''', '''r''') plane. B has no y-component then. The second equation gives, for <math> cos \theta = \mathbf{m}\cdot\mathbf{r} / mr </math> and r > 0, the following value of B components:
:<math>B_z = \frac {\mu_0} {4\pi} \frac {m} {r^3} \left( 3\cos^2\theta - 1 \right) </math>,

:<math>B_x = \frac {\mu_0} {4\pi} \frac {m} {r^3} \left( 3\sin\theta \cos\theta \right) </math>.
Root of sum of squares of the two is
:<math>B = \frac {\mu_0} {4\pi} \frac {m} {r^3} \sqrt {1 - 6\cos^2\theta + 9\cos^2\theta(\sin^2\theta+\cos^2\theta) } </math>
:<math> = \frac {\mu_0} {4\pi} \frac {m} {r^3} \sqrt {1 + 3\cos^2\theta } = \frac {\mu_0} {4\pi} \frac {m} {r^3} \sqrt {1 + 3\sin^2\lambda } </math>.
Thus, the first equation is also correct, provided you replace the boldface '''m''' by m in it. Hope this helps. --[[User:Dr Dima|Dr Dima]] ([[User talk:Dr Dima|talk]]) 03:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:And this is why I shall not be studying physics at anything beyond 'A' Level :| Regards, <font face="Tahoma" size="2px">'''[[User:Cyclonenim|CycloneNimrod]]'''</font><font size="1px"><sup>[[User_talk:Cyclonenim|Talk?]]</sup></font> 09:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

::I'll unboldface m in the article. I calculated λ based on r. The opposite side is <math>\sqrt {3+3} = \sqrt 6</math> and the adjcent is <math>\sqrt {3}</math>, so shouldn't λ be <math>\arctan \sqrt 2</math>? Does the value of '''B''' mean that a point dipole fixed here by other forces here will orient itself perpendicular to the first dipole? I was not expecting that. [[User:*Max*|*Max*]] ([[User talk:*Max*|talk]]) 17:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:::In the example you give, '''m''' = (1,0,0) and '''r''' = (1,1,1) / 3<sup>1/2</sup>. Therefore, one gets <math>\sin\lambda \equiv \cos\theta = \sqrt(1/3)</math>. As you know, <math>1 + \tan^2(\lambda) \equiv 1 / ( 1 - \sin^2(\lambda))</math>, thus, for <math>\sin^2(\lambda) = 1/3</math> you get <math>\tan^2(\lambda) = 1/2</math>, which means <math>\lambda = \arctan \left( 1 / \sqrt 2 \right) </math> . Please check. As for your second question, I did not quite understand what you mean. If you ask whether there are points in space where '''B''' vector is perpendicular to '''m''' vector, then the answer is certainly yes, for any r > 0. --[[User:Dr Dima|Dr Dima]] ([[User talk:Dr Dima|talk]]) 02:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Zero point energy ==

Is there any way to magnify the scalar forces? So that it works on large objects? Like make a car levitate or anything? [[Special:Contributions/65.41.92.123|65.41.92.123]] ([[User talk:65.41.92.123|talk]]) 02:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:I don't know much about this subject, but [[Zero_point_energy#Levitation_and_inertia]] looks relevant. --[[User:Amcbride|Allen]] ([[User talk:Amcbride|talk]]) 05:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:There's no such thing as a zero-point-energy force. The Casimir force is just an ordinary electromagnetic attraction between closely spaced neutral conducting plates. It's unusual in that you ''can'' compute its magnitude approximately from an argument involving zero-point fluctuations, but you can also compute its magnitude (more accurately) in the same way as any other electromagnetic force. See [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0503158 this paper]. That said, you can levitate macroscopic objects electromagnetically—see [[magnetic levitation]]—so in effect the answer to your question is yes. -- [[User:BenRG|BenRG]] ([[User talk:BenRG|talk]]) 13:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

::I find it interesting that the paper above contradicts the implications in the articles [[Zero_point_energy]] and [[Casimir_force]] that the Casimir force is strong evidence for the existence of zero point energy. Is it possible those two articles need to be rewritten to de-emphasize Casmir forces as being linked to zero point energy?

::Also Ben commented above that there is no such thing as a zero point energy force. My understanding is that you can't extract work out of zero point energy, since it is the lowest possible energy state, but that zero point energy itself does exist as a strictly positive amount of minimal energy. So while you presumably can't extract work from zero point energy, the random quantum fluctuations of zero point energy will prevent any system from reaching an absolute zero energy state. Am I understanding all this correctly? [[Special:Contributions/63.95.36.13|63.95.36.13]] ([[User talk:63.95.36.13|talk]]) 20:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

== Can BritaTM Containters Leach BPA? ==

Can BritaTM Containters Leach Bisphenol A? Are they made of polycarbonate? Are they made of a plastic that can leach BPA?[[Special:Contributions/68.148.164.166|68.148.164.166]] ([[User talk:68.148.164.166|talk]]) 21:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
:Can you find the plastic number marking on the container? 2 and 3 are safe, I think. [[User:Imagine Reason|Imagine Reason]] ([[User talk:Imagine Reason|talk]]) 00:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
::I could not find the plastic number marking on the container.[[Special:Contributions/68.148.164.166|68.148.164.166]] ([[User talk:68.148.164.166|talk]]) 06:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:Ask the manufacturer. Coincidentally, my brother forwarded this email from P&G: "PUR dispenser bodies are manufactured from an acrylic-based polymer classified as recycling code #7. PUR dispenser lids are manufactured from polystyrene, code #6. PUR dispenser filters are made from polypropylene, code #5, and also contain no BPA." I still won't use it, however, because it no longer filters flouride or even chlorine. [[User:Imagine Reason|Imagine Reason]] ([[User talk:Imagine Reason|talk]]) 02:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

== height and alcohol ==

sir i want to know about can alcohol drink related with height increases.
if yes how it work and if no so how some body heavy drinke and they become very tall and stong. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Dss sakti|Dss sakti]] ([[User talk:Dss sakti|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dss sakti|contribs]]) 09:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->for any sugesion u mail me plz {e-mail removed)

: I'm not aware of any study or claim saying drinking alcohol increases height. As to the second part of your question, if they drink [[beer]] they get a lot of calories. If they get enough exercise to burn those calories they'll get strong. If they don't burn the calories they get obese and may develop health problems.
: We don't respond by e-mail, please don't include your e-mail on this desk. (You never know who might use it.) --[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 10:14, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:Are you referring to children (who haven't stopped growing) being heavy drinkers? I would expect it to reduce their final height, although I have no references for that. Also, drinking while pregnant can reduce the height of the baby - see [[Fetal alcohol syndrome]]. Drinking as an adult shouldn't have any effect on height - you've stopped growing by then. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 10:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

== Glow Sticks ==

I have two questions about Glow Sticks.
1. On the article, it says that the ester oxidizes. But, I don't quite understand how it oxidizes on a molecular level. Could you please show me the equation. So far, I only know the LEO and GER.
2. How do glow sticks manage to stay bright for long periods of time? In videos/ demonstrations, they only stay bright for a few seconds.

Thanks. [[User:121energy|121energy]] ([[User talk:121energy|talk]]) 09:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[[Glow stick]] and [[Cyalume]] give the chemical equations going from oxalylic ester to carbondioxide. --[[User:Stone|Stone]] ([[User talk:Stone|talk]]) 15:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

== Re: Wheel diameter ==

(Moved up to join the original question.)

== Subtance that increases sex drive? ==

I'm doing some research for a script. I wonder if there is any drug that makes people... well... more horny? Preferably without any elaborate side effects. It should be used as a kind of "love potion", meaning it should help one character persuade another to have sex with him. I realize there's probably no substance that makes you go crazy for sex without any other side effects, but anything even remotely close to that would be enough, it's not a scientific script so I can make things up a bit to make it fit. It would be nice to just have the name of a substance that is remotely close, to make it a touch more realistic. Thanks! [[Special:Contributions/81.236.199.5|81.236.199.5]] ([[User talk:81.236.199.5|talk]]) 11:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

: The word you're looking for is [[aphrodisiac]]. There's a good list of alleged aphrodisiacs in the article. -- [[User:Coneslayer|Coneslayer]] ([[User talk:Coneslayer|talk]]) 11:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
::For fiction you might also find the human portion of [[Pheromones]] interesting. Or you could spin an idea off this [http://www.boloji.com/rt3/rt279.htm]--[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 14:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Some [[dopaminergic]] drugs have alot of anecdotal evidence supporting 'horniness'. [[MDPV]], [[methamphetamine#Sexual_behaviour]], [[yohimbine]] and [[GHB]] are the most common ones I can think from the top of my head. --[[User:Mark PEA|Mark PEA]] ([[User talk:Mark PEA|talk]]) 19:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:[[Testosterone]] is well-known to increase [[libido]]. --[[User:TotoBaggins|Sean]] 15:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Cleaning a dog skull part two ==

[[Image:Dogskull.png|thumb|left]] Here is the dog skull that I cleaned using the advice you gave [[Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2008_May_13#help_in_cleaning_up_a_dog.27s_skull|here]]. What article can we enhance with this image?--[[User:Lenticel|<span style="color: teal; background: white; font-weight: bold">Lenticel</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Lenticel|<span style="color: green; font-weight: bold">talk</span>]])</sup> 12:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:How about [[Dog anatomy]] or [[Skull]]? Only thing is there are many pictures there already. Yours is a good pic, though. [[User:Fribbler|Fribbler]] ([[User talk:Fribbler|talk]]) 12:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
{{clr}}
:Good picture - I'd add it to [[dog anatomy]], there are lots of pictures there, but none of a dog's skull! --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 12:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

== Survivable? ==

I went to see [[Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull|this film]] a couple of days ago. In it, the hero hides in a [[refrigerator|metal box]] which is thrown through the air for several miles by an explosion, before it comes crashing to the ground, tumbles end-over-end, and eventually coming to rest. The door bursts open and our hero rolls out of the box apparently unscathed by his high-speed journey. Assuming the box is strong enough to retain it's shape, would a man actually be able to such a violent journey? [[User:Astronaut|Astronaut]] ([[User talk:Astronaut|talk]]) 12:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:I doubt it. I would expect him to be crushed by the g-forces on both take off and landing. To propel a person several miles would require massive acceleration. According to [[projectile motion]], the maximum range is <math>\frac{v^2}{g}</math>, assuming he travelled 5km, that gives a minimal initial velocity of about 224m/s (higher if he wasn't launched at exactly 45 degrees), assuming the explosion provides all of that speed in 1 second, that corresponds to an acceleration of about 22g. He'd probably lose conciousness, but may survive that. However, that same amount of speed needs to be lost when it lands, and that will be done in a fraction of a section (if the box retains it's shape, it means it didn't absorb the impact and would have stopped dead), resulting in much greater accelerations, almost certainly killing to occupant. (Imagine a car crash at 500mph with none of a car's usual safety features - not likely to walk away from that!) NB: I'm ignoring air resistance - for a heavy, compact box, it's negligable. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 12:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

::In the film, the box bounced across the ground several times before finally stopping; and I suppose there could have been some minor deformation of the outside of the box (ie. it didn't change the inside shape of the box, but could have been quite dented on the outside). Could the deceleration have been such that each bounce removed some of the velocity so our hero didn't get crushed on landing? [[User:Astronaut|Astronaut]] ([[User talk:Astronaut|talk]]) 13:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:::Reality would have made for a really short movie. --[[User:LarryMac|<font color="#3EA99F">LarryMac</font>]][[User talk:LarryMac|<font color="#3EA99F"><small> | Talk</small></font>]] 13:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
::::Heh. Anybody see "Air America" with Mel Gibson, where the C130 (I think?) crashes in the jungle, and begins a long skid for about a mile over a couple of minutes before stopping, with (to me) pretty funny reaction from those on board? (It was a comedy, btw, I'm not being sociopathic). [[User:Gzuckier|Gzuckier]] ([[User talk:Gzuckier|talk]]) 15:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Bouncing would require some temporary deformation - it works by deforming the object and storing some of the kinetic energy as elastic potential energy and then that elastic energy turns back into kinetic energy and the deformation rebounds. I'm not sure what that would do to the person inside - the total change in velocity is actually greater, since you go from +224m/s to -10m/s, say, which is a change of 234, rather than the change of 224 if you stop dead. That change probably takes place over more time, though, so the acceleration (which is what's important) would be less. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 14:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:[[Alan_Magee|Stranger things have happened]]. [[User:WilyD|Wily]]<font color="FF8800">[[User talk:WilyD|D]]</font> 13:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
::That's a lot ''less'' strange. He would have been [[terminal velocity|falling]] about four times slower, plus his fall was cushioned by a handy glass roof, rather than being inside an unyielding metal object. [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 13:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:::[[Vesna Vulović|A metal box is better then?]] [[Juliane Köpcke|Or sitting comfortably in a chair?]] [[User:WilyD|Wily]]<font color="FF8800">[[User talk:WilyD|D]]</font> 13:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Actually, you make an interesting point - I neglected air resistance, since it's usually negligible for a box, but at those kind of velocities, it probably isn't any more. Terminal velocity for the box would probably be less than 500 mph, would would improve his chances, but only to the chance of surviving a fall from a plane without a parachute and not landing on anything soft, which is still pretty much zero. Falling while still in a plane (which seems to be the case with most of these miracle stories) would give you a much lower terminal velocity - there's far more drag on a large plane (even after breaking up) than on a person. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 14:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
::::The plane weighs a lot more, though. Your terminal velocity is just a function of your density and cross-sectional area. At high speeds, drag is going to go like r<sup>2</sup>v<sup>2</sup> and gravity will go like ρr<sup>3</sup>. If you're roughly spherical, your terminal velocity scales like v<sub>t</sub> ~ ρ<sup>½</sup>r<sup>½</sup> ... density's probably irrelevent (you're 1, a plane with lots of airspace is probably ~1. So person strapped to a chair = person, person in aircraft depends on chunk size, but they're falling faster. [[User:WilyD|Wily]]<font color="FF8800">[[User talk:WilyD|D]]</font> 14:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:::::My very rough calculations say that the density of a fully laden 747 is about <s>200</s> 50 <small>Note to self: Diameter and radius aren't the same thing!</small> times less than that of a person (based on [[Boeing 747#Specifications]]). They are designed to be a light as possible, otherwise they wouldn't be able to fly. Even broken up into a few pieces, it's going to be significantly less than a person, and terminal velocity will be significantly reduced. (Unless you're unlucky enough to end up in a nose dive, perhaps.) --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 15:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah, deceleration by a long series of bumps, rolls, disintegration, etc. looks spectacular, but will keep peak G forces down to survivable levels. Look for the various Youtube videos of the Michael Mcdowell Texas Nascar Crash from a couple of months back. Since the OP's guy in a box is not strapped in, he has to avoid impact with the inside wall of the box, but if it's spinning, centrifugal force could keep him "strapped down" figuratively and prevent him from fracturing his skull. Kids: don't try this at home. [[User:Gzuckier|Gzuckier]] ([[User talk:Gzuckier|talk]]) 15:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
::I doubt it would spin reliably enough while bouncing. If it's small enough, he could wedge himself inside so he doesn't get shaken around. Even with all the bouncing, landing at terminal velocity in a metal box doesn't sound survivable to me without something to absorb the impact. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 15:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:::But if you are [[Indiana Jones]], [[GURPS|cinematic rules]] override kinematic rules! --[[User:Stephan Schulz|Stephan Schulz]] ([[User talk:Stephan Schulz|talk]]) 15:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:It's also probably worth noting that the amount of lead in a lead refrigerator would not have protected the hero in question from the thing in question that tossed him. Even if he had, improbably, survived he'd have probably gotten quick sick. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 19:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I think the original poster is wrong to assume the metal box was thrown "several miles". As I understood the scene, it didn't move particularly far; it's just that the same thing that put it in motion also damaged the surrounding area, so it may have looked different. You don't see it flying through the air or anything. --Anonymous, somewhere in the real world, 00:01 UTC, May 29, 2008.
::Actually, it was shown flying through the air. In fact, from what I remember, its first bounce was just in front of the army car which was driving away from the explosion. The car didn't make it, but the fridge carried on bouncing. [[User:Jdrewitt|Jdrewitt]] ([[User talk:Jdrewitt|talk]]) 08:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Oh. Perhaps I remembered seeing what I expected to see, then. --Anon, 23:49 UTC, May 29.

:you all seem to be forgetting that each time the box experiences a collision, its passenger is going to experience an internal collision. Our hero would've been broken and bloody after that trip, even if the box stayed closed and intact. Which it wouldn't have. --[[User:Shaggorama|Shaggorama]] ([[User talk:Shaggorama|talk]]) 03:41, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

::I think the most ridiculous thing that has been lost in all of this (having just returned from a showing of said movie) is that he stands in the immediate aftermath of (what one can only assume is) a fairly dirty uranium-fission explosion, what looks like less than a mile from ground zero, with no long- or short-term effects on his health. The physics of that whole movie was (were?) shall we say, less than intelligent. -<b><font color="black">[[User:Runningonbrains|Running]]</font><font color="blue">[[WP:METEO|On]]</font><font color="green">[[User talk: Runningonbrains|Brains]]</font></b> 05:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::I bet his hair was perfectly styled when he stood up too. That always happens to me when I get caught in nuclear explosions :) And I always get clean clothes in the next scene. [[User:Franamax|Franamax]] ([[User talk:Franamax|talk]]) 08:18, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::::He was rinsed off afterwards though to remove any radioactive particles on the outside of his body. As long as he didn't ingest any of these particles then he would be ok. The largest fraction of gamma radiation is emitted in the very first milliseconds of a nuclear explosion, during which time he was in the lead lined fridge (why was the fridge lead lined?) which would have reduced the dose. [[User:Jdrewitt|Jdrewitt]] ([[User talk:Jdrewitt|talk]]) 08:31, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Homing distance of snails ==

Sorry - I didn't check responses to my question: How far can snails travel back to their usual habitat if you remove them from this? within the 4 days. Please would anyone who knows the answer repeat it for me? Thank you. Ruth 555[[User:Ruth555|Ruth555]] ([[User talk:Ruth555|talk]]) 12:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:The previous question is archived [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2008_May_21#Snails_and_their_homing_instinct here]. No-one knew a distance, they suggested marking the shells before releasing them so you can tell if they come back. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 12:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Original Research is frowned upon here, but it is allowed if no one can come up with a reference. Why not find out and tell us? On day one, pull each snail off, mark it with a red X and gently relocate it 100m away. On day 2, if any snails have a red X you know they can go 100m, so use a green marker and try 200m. If none have made it back, try 50m. Anyway, you have to use different colors and symbols so that on day 3 you know whether the returnees were from day 1 or day 2, etc. Once you have run out of colors use a circle, etc. Ensure that the marks are non-toxic because the experiment ends when you get tired of it and eat them. -[[User:SandyJax|SandyJax]] ([[User talk:SandyJax|talk]]) 16:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:Original research is frowned upon only when describing it in articles. Experimentation is highly encouraged, however it needs to be described in a reliable source before it can be included in an article. It would make a great school science project, though. ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 18:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== /media/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Musical_instrument_classification_by_physics-based_organology.png ==

What is the instrument with the guy with his fingers in those beer glasses?[[Special:Contributions/68.148.164.166|68.148.164.166]] ([[User talk:68.148.164.166|talk]]) 12:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:It's known as a [[Glass harp]]. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 12:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

::It's not clear why it is shown under the heading [[Plasmaphone]] though. [[User:Pfly|Pfly]] ([[User talk:Pfly|talk]]) 21:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:(edit conflict) That is NOT a glass harp. A glass harp is played by running your finger around the rim of the glass. In that picture, the musician clearly has his fingers in the water. Moreover, the water level is the same in each glass, so there would be no difference in pitch. My guess is the cords connected to the glasses aren't just lighting them up: I'm betting those fluids are charged. I can only speculate how the instrument works, but maybe by sticking his fingers in the liquid, he changes its conductance properties, or cause a current to pass through his body changing the conductance of the system....I can only guess. In any event, it's probably some sort of fancy [[electronic instrument]] or [[user interface]] -- [[User:Shaggorama|Shaggorama]] ([[User talk:Shaggorama|talk]]) 03:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::Good point. I'd assumed his fingers were inside the glasses simply because he was getting them wet, and he wasn't actually playing at that instant. I hadn't noticed the water levels were all the same - there must be something more going on (presumably to do with the wires, as you say). --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 13:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Current, volts, Ohm's law... ==

Ok, I think after all this time I still do not really have a good grasp of what [[Electric current|current]] is (and I've read the articles).

We normally rate batteries by their [[voltage]]. So a battery might have 1.5 Volts, say. If we connect a resistor across the battery's terminals, a current goes through it. That current can be calculated by [[Ohm's Law]]: I = V/R. So if we have a 10 ohm resistor, we have 0.15 Amps coming out of the battery, right?

If we have a resistor which is 0.1 ohms, we have 150 amps going through the resistor. So I guess we can keep going up to nearly infinity if we keep making the resistance smaller, is that right? (Except eventually the battery will run out.)

However, when I look at solar cells, they give both a voltage and a current (or sometimes they just give a current). So I might have a cell that says it provides 1 amp. So if I connect a resistor across it, is the voltage of the cell going to change? The current? I assume that Ohm's law has to be maintained?

Why are solar cells and batteries different? Can batteries produce any current they want, and cells can only produce a fixed current? Or is it a maximum current? What happens if I have a 5V solar cell connected across an 0.001 Ohm resistor? What is the current?

Thanks! &mdash; Sam 14:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:Ah; the catch is (there's always a catch) that batteries and solar cells are not ideal voltage sources, nothing being ideal, the way they are often simplified as. In the real world, of course the battery/solar cell has its own internal resistance; everything does. So, if your 1.5 volt battery has a 1 ohm internal resistance, then even if it is short circuited, it's not going to deliver any more than 1.5 amps. Same for the solar cell. Same for transformers, anything in the real world; there's always an internal resistance which needs to be factored in in some cases. Of course, also there's internal capacitance and inductance which may need to be accounted for under some conditions; that's why electronic engineers who understand real things not just ideal things do a better job. [[User:Gzuckier|Gzuckier]] ([[User talk:Gzuckier|talk]]) 15:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:(See also [[internal resistance]]). [[User:TenOfAllTrades|TenOfAllTrades]]([[User_talk:TenOfAllTrades|talk]]) 15:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

::If you'll allow me to expand on [[User:Gzuckier|Gzuckier]]'s point, we normally design electronics so that our "voltage sources" are operating pretty close to the regime of being an "ideal" voltage source. That is, while a battery might deliver (say) 5 amps into a dead short, it's commonly used in equipment that's drawing far less current, say 0.25 Amps. There are three reasons for this:

::# It makes the circuitry a lot easier to design if you can mostly ignore the internal resistance of the voltage source (battery).
::# It would be wasteful if the battery were internally dissipating a large share of the total power that was being consumed from it. To a first approximation, if you tried to operate our hypothetical "5 amp" battery with a 2.5 Amp load, roughly half the power being produced from the battery's chemical reaction is being dissipated in the load and half the power within the battery itself. The power dissipated within the battery does '''no useful work'''.
::# The internal resistance of a battery rises as it ages. If you design your circuit to consume a lot less current than a new battery is capable of, an old, decrepit battery may still be capable of powering the circuit.

::Hydraulic analogies are often useful in this case. A 1.5 volt battery might be compared to a water tank 1.5 metres off the ground. That tiny AAA cell represents a tank of 1 litre capacity. That big D cell represents a tank of 20 litres capacity. The bigger tank also has a proportionally-larger shut-off valve on the tank's discharge connection. Now, connect a drainage pipe to the tank. For a very skinny pipe, both tanks will provide adequate water pressure but the AAA-sized tank will run out of water twenty times as fast as the D-size tank. Now connect a bigger discharge tube to the tanks. For the tiny tank, the tank's discharge valve will limit water flow into the big pipe and there'll be very little pressure in the discharge pipe. But for the D-sized tank, its larger discharge valve can still provide full water flow into the discharge pipe and full water pressure. Batteries (and solar cells and most other voltage sources) work just like this.

::[[User:Atlant|Atlant]] ([[User talk:Atlant|talk]]) 17:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:::Ok, that makes a little sense. However, I still don't quite understand why solar panels are rated just by their amperage. Is a "one amp" panel describing the current that would be delivered into a short? &mdash; Sam 20:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC) <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/63.138.152.238|63.138.152.238]] ([[User talk:63.138.152.238|talk]]) </small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::::It's more likely a roughly defined point at which the internal resistance can be considered negligible, and thus at which the cell is suitable for powering a given application. As Atlant notes in the 5-amp (short current) battery example, it wouldn't make sense to use it in a 2.5 amp application, either. &mdash; [[User talk :Lomn|Lomn]] 21:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

::::I don't know about the case of solar cells, but normally when both a voltage and an amperage are quoted the voltage is an estimate while the amperage is a maximum. E.g. a 240V 13A wall socket will maintain a potential difference of about 240 volts and you shouldn't try to draw more than 13 amps from it or something bad will happen (in this case a tripped circuit breaker). -- [[User:BenRG|BenRG]] ([[User talk:BenRG|talk]]) 23:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

::::::A battery or solar cell could be characterized by the open circuit (no load voltage), which will be the highest possible output voltage, higher than seen when it is supplying current, and the short circuit current, which is quite high (several amps) even for an AA alkaline cell. But such a high current would limit the useful life to a very short period for a battery, and the voltage would drop dramatically. Another rating system would be so many amps (or milliamps) at a certain output voltage for normal or optimal operation. For example, a 200 Watt Kyocera solar panel [http://www.solarhome.org/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=1181] specifies that for max power output, the current should be 7.61 amps and the voltage should be 26.3 volts, the product of current times voltage equalling 200.61 Watts,which implies a total external circuit resistance including the load of 3.46 Ohms. but says the short circuit current is 8.21 amps and the open circuit voltage is 32.9 volts. The power under short circuit conditions would be 8.21 amps times zero volts, or zero Watts. The power for open circuit conditions would be 32.9 volts times zero amps, or zero Watts. For conditions close to short circuit or open circuit, the output power would be nonzero but far smaller than the 200 Watt maximum. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 02:41, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== solar power ==

i want get the details of solar power process and its panel types with photo graph & the details of batterys used to store power with maximum capacity and its configration details

if provide.any source or call center to discuss about said details <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/124.125.42.50|124.125.42.50]] ([[User talk:124.125.42.50|talk]]) 15:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I would think that [[solar energy]] would be a good place to start and then, when you have specific questions, ask again. -- [[User:Kainaw|<font color='#ff0000'>k</font><font color='#cc0033'>a</font><font color='#990066'>i</font><font color='#660099'>n</font><font color='#3300cc'>a</font><font color='#0000ff'>w</font>]][[User talk:Kainaw|&trade;]] 19:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

== Homing Instinct of snails. ==

Thank you for responding to my latest enquiry. The idea of nail varnish is a good one. Please be patient with my lack of expertise on this site. I'm aware that this is a response, rather than another question, but am not sure how to slot this comment into the correct place! As a newcomer, I'm enjoying the site immensely! What a variety of different subjects - I've spent hours reading through the topics instead of getting on with my own work - I'm in process of writing a novel. Ruth555[[User:Ruth555|Ruth555]] ([[User talk:Ruth555|talk]]) 15:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:I answered the question above. -[[User:SandyJax|SandyJax]] ([[User talk:SandyJax|talk]]) 16:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:Hello Ruth - we're glad you're enjoying yourself. When you want to add to an existing section, just click on the "edit" link on the right side of the line that contains the section title. --[[User:LarryMac|<font color="#3EA99F">LarryMac</font>]][[User talk:LarryMac|<font color="#3EA99F"><small> | Talk</small></font>]] 16:19, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

== Chemistry: What exactly is produced by immersing steel in salt water? ==

I know that rust is produced, but what gas is created?

I've noticed bubbles continually forming. Is it chlorine? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.81.198.165|24.81.198.165]] ([[User talk:24.81.198.165|talk]]) 20:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:It's got to be hydrogen. [[Rust]] is a mix of [[iron oxides]]. Since there isn't enough dissolved oxygen in water to rust things very fast, the water must be dissociating into hydrogen and oxygen. The oxygen combines with the iron in steel to form rust, and the leftover hydrogen atoms combine to form hydrogen gas. --[[User:Carnildo|Carnildo]] ([[User talk:Carnildo|talk]]) 20:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

== Ethyl Alcohol ==

Hello. Is C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>5</sub>OH a hydrocarbon? When burning, is the chemical equation: C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>5</sub>OH + 3O<sub>2</sub> → 2CO<sub>2</sub> + 3H<sub>2</sub>O? Can this reaction possibly be double displacement? Thanks in advance. --[[User:Mayfare|Mayfare]] ([[User talk:Mayfare|talk]]) 21:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:Have a look at [[Ethanol]], [[Alcohol]] and [[Metathesis reaction]] (double displacement). '''[[User:Jkasd|<font color="#445599">J</font>]][[User_talk:Jkasd|<font color="#44AA66">kasd</font>]]''' 21:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
::You should also take a look at [[combustion]]. '''''[[User:Bibliomaniac15|<font color="black">bibliomaniac</font>]][[User talk:Bibliomaniac15|<font color="red">1</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Bibliomaniac15|<font color="blue">5</font>]]''''' 04:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Terminal Velocity ==

This French guy has just recently failed in an attempt to float his helium balloon at 40,000m and then jump out, free-falling for around 15 minutes before opening his parachute. In every article I have read about this, it says at 35,000m he would have been expected to break the sound barrier. Is this possible? I know at that height the air is relatively thinner and there would therefore be less friction, but surely his terminal velocity would not rise from c. 150mph (nearer the ground) to over 750mph? Also, would there be a sonic boom and what effect would this have on him, considering he wouldn't be in the safety of a jet-plane?--[[User:Givnan|ChokinBako]] ([[User talk:Givnan|talk]]) 21:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:I can't comment on the specifics, but one thing people sometimes forget is: the only reason a falling object has a terminal velocity at all is air resistance. So, if the air resistance almost goes away, the resulting speeds could be very high. [[User:Friday|Friday]] [[User talk:Friday|(talk)]] 21:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
::Also, the speed of sound varies with temperature. Lower temperatures at high altitude decrease the speed of sound. See [[sound speed gradient]] for a discussion of this phenomenon. &mdash; [[User talk :Lomn|Lomn]] 21:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
::Indeed 150mph is not an accurate terminal velocity near the ground. According to [[Terminal velocity]] an experienced skydiver can achieve about 200 mph by optimising body position (of course an experienced skydiver wouldn't want to be at that speed to near the ground, but hopefully people get what I mean). According to [http://hypertextbook.com/facts/JianHuang.shtml] the record is 321MPH without any special equipment and [[Joseph W. Kittinger]] achieved 619mph [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 23:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

== TECHIE COOLIE ==

Who is a TECHIE COOLIE & Why are they so called?[[Special:Contributions/117.197.240.153|117.197.240.153]] ([[User talk:117.197.240.153|talk]]) 21:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
:It could be a racial slur about someone who is a "techie". See [[techie]] and [[coolie]]. [[User:Friday|Friday]] [[User talk:Friday|(talk)]] 21:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:Alternatively, it may derive from the use of "coolie" to indicate a brute-force laborer. That would still leave it a derogatory remark, though perhaps not an outright slur. In any event, Google shows very little use of the phrase, so there's not likely a definitive answer. &mdash; [[User talk :Lomn|Lomn]] 21:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

::It could be a derogatory remark about the techie's employer, saying that they treat their workers like coolies. That seems the most likely interpretation to me, but of course I'm guessing. --Anonymous, 00:05 UTC, May 29, 2008.

:::Perhaps he works next door to the [[Code monkey]]. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 02:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Water + grease fire: Why so much energy released? ==

RE: http://www.youtube.com/v/kS9inNW4KS8 -- Why is so much energy released when water is added to a grease fire? I'm wondering whether the combustion of the fuel in an internal combustion engine could be similarly augmented, by injecting some water into the cylinder, either with the fuel or separately, before or immediately after ignition.
--[[User:Nonlocal|Nonlocal]] ([[User talk:Nonlocal|talk]]) 21:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)Nonlocal
:All that's happening is that the water is (very quickly) brought to a boil by the hot oil. So, it bubbles and expands and the hot grease goes everywhere, and the fire spreads. There is such a thing as water injection in automotive technology (see [[Water injection (engines)]], but it's about cooling, not getting energy out of the water. [[User:Friday|Friday]] [[User talk:Friday|(talk)]] 22:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:Man, what is it with the British and their very disturbing PSAs! Yikes! --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 01:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Disturbing = unlikely to be forgotten [[User:Theresa knott|Theresa Knott]] | [[User talk:Theresa knott|The otter sank]] 06:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

::::I think my main confusion is that the British seem to think their PSAs should actually be useful rather than just hollow ad campaigns used to write-off a tax deduction or something along those lines. ;-) American PSAs are almost always totally toothless, laughable, poorly designed and poorly executed. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 15:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

::That's a pretty awesome demonstration in that video. I think the fire grows so rapidly because the explosive boiling of the water conitnually throws up grease because it's contained in the pot (and there's also probably an unusual amount of grease in the pot). Normally, grease fires don't result from pots of grease like that; usually, the flaming grease is in a pan and there is less of it. In that scenario, adding water spreads the fire around instead of making it grow like that. But in any event, don't put water on a grease fire! --[[User:Shaggorama|Shaggorama]] ([[User talk:Shaggorama|talk]]) 03:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:::A kilogram of TNT releases less enery than a candle of 1kg, but it looks different, becaus the candle takes hours and the TNT far less than a second for the reaction.--[[User:Stone|Stone]] ([[User talk:Stone|talk]]) 05:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:The paper, [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiImageURL&_imagekey=B6V37-491C17X-1-R&_cdi=5723&_user=3132&_check=y&_orig=search&_coverDate=11%2F30%2F2003&view=c&wchp=dGLbVlb-zSkWA&md5=5add76b8b7dca6f510fe28afd4512721&ie=/sdarticle.pdflink On the interaction of a liquid droplet with a pool of hot cooking oil, Short communications], by S.L. Manzello, J.C. Yang and T.G. Cleary (Fire Safety J 38 7 (2003), pp. 651–659), notes that such occurrences of rapid boiling of water "have been termed vapor explosions, explosive boiling, or rapid vapor explosions." --[[User:Nonlocal|Nonlocal]] ([[User talk:Nonlocal|talk]]) 16:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Conservation laws and space-time symmetry ==

As I understand the modern conception of physics, [[conservation laws]] arise because of symmetries in the laws of physics ([[Noether's theorem]], I think). Conservation of momentum is the result of the universe being symmetric under spatial translation, conservation of angular momentum is due to spatial rotational symmetry, and the conservation of energy is due to time translational symmetry. However, we also have the concept of [[space-time]], where there is no distinction between space and time (after accounting for a few -1's, [[Imaginary unit|i's]], and [[speed of light|c's]]). So if we have conservation of angular momentum due to rotational symmetry in the x-y plane (a rotation that occurs between two spatial axises), is there a conservation law for rotation in the x-t plane? (That is, a rotation that occurs between a spatial axis and the time axis.) - How about for rotations and translations involving the other 6+ dimensions proposed by string theory? -- [[Special:Contributions/128.104.112.147|128.104.112.147]] ([[User talk:128.104.112.147|talk]]) 22:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:The best way to think about it is to consider the [[metric tensor|metric]]. It will be a function of your coordinates, (t,x,y,z), say. If it doesn't depend on one of them, you have a conserved quantity (momentum in that direction, roughly speaking - see [[Killing field]] for more details). If you use different co-ordinates, for example, [[spherical coordinates]], you may find that the metric doesn't depend on one of the angles, that gives you conservation of momentum in the direction of that angle - angular momentum, in other words. If you choose a coordinate system in which one of the coordinates is a rotation in the x-t plane, I imagine you would find that the metric does depend on that coordinate (those -1's, i's and c's do need to be accounted for!), so you don't get a conserved quantity. I'd have to find pen and paper to work it out for sure. The extra dimensions of string theory would definitely allow for extra conserved quantities, but if you ever actually have Killing fields in those directions, I don't know. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 23:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

:The conserved quantity associated with rotation around the origin in the ''xy'' plane is ''x p<sub>y</sub> − y p<sub>x</sub>'', i.e. the angular momentum around the origin in the ''xy'' plane. This holds for any pair of perpendicular axes, even if one of them is timelike. So the conserved quantity associated with rotation in the ''xt'' plane is ''x E − t p<sub>x</sub>''. I'll let you work out what that represents. Note that it depends explicitly on ''t'', unlike the conserved quantities people normally talk about, but that's not a deep difference—you just plug in different values of ''t'' at different times.

::But the laws of physics are ''not'' symmetric with respect to ordinary rotation in the ''xt'' plane; you need a [[Lorentz transformation]] instead. I'll let someone else figure out what the corresponding conserved quantity is, though. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 22:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::The Lorentz symmetries give rise to conservation of [[four-momentum]], surely? [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 22:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:I don't know whether the [[Calabi-Yau manifold]]s that describe the extra six dimensions in string theory have any symmetries that lead to conserved quantities. In [[Kaluza-Klein theory]] I think that the conserved quantity associated with translation in the fifth dimension is the electric charge. -- [[User:BenRG|BenRG]] ([[User talk:BenRG|talk]]) 00:19, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

= May 29 =

== electrons and perpetual motion ==

To start off, I am a 17 year old high school student that has just completed his first year of high school-level physics. I'm pretty smart (at least I like to think so), but if this question can't be answered with vocabulary and ideas that someone of my edjucation level will be able to understand, that's ok. The answer to this question is probably in Wikipedia somewhere, but in my reading I've only seen equations and explanations that I don't think I'll ever understand until sometime through college.

Question: If there is no such thing as perpetual motion, how can electrons keep moving around the nucleus of an atom? My guess is that at the level we're talking about, there's not really anything like friction in the common sense, so there's nothing to act against the electrons after they are moving, but then where does the energy come from to move them in the first place?[[User:Hypershadow647|Hypershadow647]] ([[User talk:Hypershadow647|talk]]) 00:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:The motion of electrons in an atom is perpetual motion in the ordinary English sense but not in the technical sense used in physics. A "perpetual motion machine" in physics is a system that violates the [[first law of thermodynamics]] (a "free energy machine" or "perpetual motion machine of the first kind") or the [[second law of thermodynamics]] (a "perpetual motion machine of the second kind"). The electrons in an atom don't gain or lose energy or entropy (at least not without interacting with the outside world), so they don't violate either of those laws. -- [[User:BenRG|BenRG]] ([[User talk:BenRG|talk]]) 00:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:You'll be happy to know that it's not a dumb question at all—in fact, it was a major objection to the original [[Ernest Rutherford|Rutherford atomic model]], that the electrons seemed to whip around without losing energy, and if you imagine them behaving like any other gravitating object (like a planet) you'd expect that not to work out. [[Bohr model|Bohr's great insight]], the insight which set off quantum ''mechanics'' (as distinct from the original quantum ''theory'' by Planck and Einstein), was that if you ''take for granted'' that the electrons can do that in specific orbitals, that they are not in "motion" in the same way that we understand it to be on a macroscopic level, then it all works out perfectly well mathematically and according to experiment, ''even if'' it doesn't make as much conceptual sense (this is the kernel of what would become the [[Copenhagen interpretation]] of Bohr and Heisenberg). Einstein thought this approach to physics was repulsive—to come up with answers that didn't make any intuitive sense, as he saw it—but Bohr's method won out in the end, and much of quantum mechanics is about taking for granted certain properties of the quantum world which are not shared by the macroscopic world. Why don't electrons behave like billiard balls, is essentially your question, and the answer is simply ''because the laws that govern billiard balls don't apply on that scale.'' --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 01:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:::Whoa, whoa, whoa. Bohr's atomic model did help inspire quantum theory, but it was ''completely wrong''. Real electrons are nothing like the electrons in Bohr's model. They don't even have the angular momenta that Bohr thought they did. Bohr thought the angular momenta were 1, 2, 3, ..., but in fact they're 0, <math>\sqrt{2}</math>, <math>\sqrt{6}</math>, .... I think it was little more than dumb luck that his model gave the right values for the [[atomic spectral line|hydrogen spectrum]] (which could be measured to confirm it) despite having the wrong values for the angular momenta (which couldn't be measured). And quantum mechanics ''does'' explain the quantization of the orbits, it doesn't simply assume it the way Bohr's model did. [[Schroedinger's equation]] doesn't have any quantization built in; you have to [[hydrogen atom|solve it]] before you discover that the electron orbits are quantized.

:::There are two things that keep the electrons from dropping into a state of zero energy: the [[uncertainty principle]] and the [[exclusion principle]]. They're both hard to explain. The electron can't just fall into the nucleus because the nucleus is very small; that would give the electron a well defined position, which would mean that it would have to have a very uncertain momentum, which would quickly propel it out of the nucleus again. The "ground state" is a compromise between position uncertainty and momentum uncertainty. The exclusion principle comes into play when there's more than one electron in the atom. Without the exclusion principle they would all fall into the ground state, since systems "like" to have the lowest energy possible. With the exclusion principle you can only have one electron in each state, so some of them have to be in higher-energy states with larger angular momenta (meaning they're actually orbiting the atom, unlike the ground state electrons which have an angular momentum of zero and could be said to not be moving at all). -- [[User:BenRG|BenRG]] ([[User talk:BenRG|talk]]) 04:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

::If the electron were a ball bearing circling inside a hemispherical bowl, or a weight tied to a string circling around the point of suspension, friction and air resistance would cause it to drop gradually to lower and lower levels. The reason electrons do not show such a gradual decay of energy level, as it was explained to me back when, is that even taking it as a sort of standing wave, it might be expected to bleed off energy like an electromagnetic wave circling on a loop of conductor. The quantum effect is the theory or observation that it cannot drop gradually to imperceptibly lower energy energy levels as the circling weights could in the mechanical analogies. Only a quantum of energy can be absorbed or emitted, changing it to a higher or lower energy level, thus no slight gradual decay of energy level is possible.[[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 02:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:::It's true that only a quantum of energy (a [[photon]]) can be absorbed or emitted, but the energy of a photon can be arbitrarily small, so in effect the energy that can be emitted isn't quantized at all. So this can't explain why the electron orbit doesn't decay. -- [[User:BenRG|BenRG]] ([[User talk:BenRG|talk]]) 04:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

::::However, the stable energy states around a nucleus are quantized as well, and this imposes the appropriate restriction on the possible photons that can be emitted. [[User:ConMan|Confusing Manifestation]]<small>([[User talk:ConMan|Say hi!]])</small> 04:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

::::: I don't know about our 17 year old OP, but reading through this thread I'd feel confused (and not just in manifestation). So can we explain it in understandable terms without sacrificing enough to run into my favorite [[Feynman]] quote?--[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 16:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

It may be helpful to the OP that a "perpetual motion machine" is essentially something that can perform work indefinitely without an external source of power. Electrons moving around a nucleus, or moons orbiting a planet orbiting a sun, are perpetually in motion, although there is no energy expenditure to maintain that motion. ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 18:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== antioxidants to delay ageing and damage of cells ==

what combinations work and do they¿ i know you cant give medical advice, but what does science say so far about the effectivity of them¨¿thnx guys <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.69.26.8|75.69.26.8]] ([[User talk:75.69.26.8|talk]]) 03:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:The empirical evidence to date has been quite disappointing; the benefits are largely theoretical rather than demonstrated. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 05:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:While antioxidants are great at scavenging damaging free radicals generated via metabolism, which can denature proteins and injury other macromolecules such as nucleic acids and lipids, there is no conclusive evidence that they prevent general cellular senescence. See [[telomeres]]. [[User:Wisdom89|'''<font color="#660000">Wisdom89</font>''']] <sub>([[User_talk:Wisdom89|<small><sub><font color="#17001E">T</font></sub></small>]] / [[Special:Contributions/Wisdom89|<small><sup><font color="#17001E">C</font></sup></small>]])</sub> 06:45, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Career ==

What jobs and career options are there in relation with animation? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/117.194.225.94|117.194.225.94]] ([[User talk:117.194.225.94|talk]]) 03:55, 29 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:If I had to surmise, I'd say a viable option would be 3D video game development. [[User:Wisdom89|'''<font color="#660000">Wisdom89</font>''']] <sub>([[User_talk:Wisdom89|<small><sub><font color="#17001E">T</font></sub></small>]] / [[Special:Contributions/Wisdom89|<small><sup><font color="#17001E">C</font></sup></small>]])</sub> 06:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

::There are tons of video animation companies for everything from bad car commercials to popular children's movies. -- [[User:Kainaw|<font color='#ff0000'>k</font><font color='#cc0033'>a</font><font color='#990066'>i</font><font color='#660099'>n</font><font color='#3300cc'>a</font><font color='#0000ff'>w</font>]][[User talk:Kainaw|&trade;]] 12:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::There are quite a few unique ones, too. If you like kids you can run animation workshops at museums or fair events, for one. What job you can find and end up in might not be the same as the "standard" job description. And even that can differ from one place to another. --[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 16:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Thermo Pond Epoxy ==

Hi. I saw a '3rd Rock From the Sun' episode where mary albright puts this chemical on dick solomon's desk, because earlier they had been playing impractical jokes on one another.
Dick comes in and sits at his desk. as soon as he puts his hands on the desk, they are instantly stuck. Then he uses too much force to get his hands off and he accidently puts his head on the desk and then is stuck to this position. My question is: Can this chemical really do that sort of thing, paste objects together that quickly?[[User:Jwking|Jwking]] ([[User talk:Jwking|talk]]) 05:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:Yes, some types of superglue can. There are loads of documented cases of people putting it on toilet seats, glasses etc. Not a very sociable think to do. If you put it on a non-porous surface skin will bond almost instantly. There have also been eyeball to eyelid and similar in accidents. I'd stick to clingfilm for jokes... --[[User:BozMo|BozMo]] [[user talk:BozMo|talk]] 06:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::Since detaching the stuck human can require medical assistance this way exceeds funny. The doctors and lawyers will laugh all the way to the bank, though. (Neither legal nor medical advice)--[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 16:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Brain + Sex ==

What part of the brain becomes more active during sexual arousal? Or at least, what part controls that. --[[Special:Contributions/68.90.143.120|68.90.143.120]] ([[User talk:68.90.143.120|talk]]) 06:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:The [[Raphe nucleus]] and [[serotonin]] are thought to be involved. [[User:Wisdom89|'''<font color="#660000">Wisdom89</font>''']] <sub>([[User_talk:Wisdom89|<small><sub><font color="#17001E">T</font></sub></small>]] / [[Special:Contributions/Wisdom89|<small><sup><font color="#17001E">C</font></sup></small>]])</sub> 06:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:Well, speaking as a guy, it's pretty clear your entire brain goes on vacation. [[User:Gzuckier|Gzuckier]] ([[User talk:Gzuckier|talk]]) 20:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Under a burning night sky ==

I'm curious why the sky is orange during nighttime. First of all it was 10 pm so I discount the sun. It is relatively cloudy and rainy during the night and the clouds are actually the ones that is a dull orange. I live in [[Manila]] so the air pollution is strong but I can't account fo r the orange hue as we use fluorescent lamps here rather than oil or fires.--[[User:Lenticel|<span style="color: teal; background: white; font-weight: bold">Lenticel</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Lenticel|<span style="color: green; font-weight: bold">talk</span>]])</sup> 06:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:[[Sodium lamp|Sodium]] street lamps? (See the section on light pollution) [[Special:Contributions/81.174.226.229|81.174.226.229]] ([[User talk:81.174.226.229|talk]]) 08:41, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::Also the article on [[Light pollution]] [[User:Jdrewitt|Jdrewitt]] ([[User talk:Jdrewitt|talk]]) 12:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::hmm... I think you're right. It is [[Skyglow]]. No wonder this never happens when I'm in the provinces. --[[User:Lenticel|<span style="color: teal; background: white; font-weight: bold">Lenticel</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Lenticel|<span style="color: green; font-weight: bold">talk</span>]])</sup> 12:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::::Hi. This happens here too, where I live in Southern Ontario. The streetlights cause the clouds to turn orange, and this can cause it to reflect into my bedroom window, where there are no nearby streetlights, so much so that I can see penumbral shadows of objects and even read printed text in the dark (but just barely and only with night vision adaptation caused by pupil expansion). When there are no clouds, or when the clouds are high, the light isn't strong enough to be reflected. However, if there is say a snowstorm, the light will illuminate the nearby snowflakes the way the sun illuminates dandelion seeds flying on a cool, windy, clear spring day. I've also noticed that the far away cloud bases sometimes appear darker than the nearby clouds, perhaps escaping the light pollution. Hope this helps. Thanks. ~<font color="blue">[[User:AstroHurricane001/A|A]][[User:AstroHurricane001|H]][[User:AstroHurricane001/D|1]]</font><sup>([[User:AstroHurricane001/T|T]][[Special:Contributions/AstroHurricane001|C]][[User:AstroHurricane001/U|U]])</sup> 17:16, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Power Generators ==

I was wondering how efficient generators are at converting mechanical energy from the rotating magnet to electrical energy? [[Special:Contributions/61.69.132.119|61.69.132.119]] ([[User talk:61.69.132.119|talk]]) 07:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:I think it's about 80-85%, which is from actual, but half-remembered, research. If someone doesn't give the definitive answer, I'll try and get back to you. It's definitely quite high, because the overall efficiency is about 40%, with most of the losses at an early stage, I think in the production of steam. [[Special:Contributions/130.95.106.128|130.95.106.128]] ([[User talk:130.95.106.128|talk]]) 11:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::I second the 80-85%, but can't quote a good source either. I know the figure from adding up losses for overall systems in which case it would be stated as a 15-20% loss. --[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 17:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::Surely it is higher than 80 to 85%, given that in 1879 Thomas Edison's "Long legged Mary Ann" generator achieved 82% mechanical to electrical efficiency, a sizeable increase from the 40% of earlier generators, with his reasearch team over the next decade achieving 90% efficiency [http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0001083.html] . If present day 1000 megawatt utility baseload generator were 15% to <s>80</s> 20 % inefficient, it would get heated up by 150 to 200 megawatts, which seems unlikely. [http://www.jcmiras.net/jcm/item/93/] cites 93% to 97% efficiency for small hydro generators. [http://eetimes.eu/uk//showArticle.jhtml?articleID=47900078] says a wind generator has achieved 98% efficiency. [http://www3.toshiba.co.jp/power/english/thermal/service/generators/men02/efficiency.htm] cites an 800 megawatt generator's efficiency being increased from 98.93% to 99.01% efficiency via stator rewinding and other improvements. I wonder if the lower efficiency deducts the auxiliary equipment such as coal handling, plant lighting, pumps etc? [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 19:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::I guess not all your losses are heat. You lose quite a bit to vibration. I've seen the 80-85% ballpark used in wind turbine and cogeneration setups. (And I've usually seen those come out on the low end rather than overshoot the target.) It should be straightforward enough Joules in Watt out, but there's a lot of leeway in who measures what where as usual. If you look at steam temperature/wind energy to power output you get a different number than if you look at torque to output. [[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 22:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:I (130.95) will probably have to take back what I wrote. My notes, based on the rather old (1970s) book ''Man, Energy, Society'' by Earl Cook, tell me that the steam generator (in combination, called a furnace, boiler and superheater) is about 85% efficient, not at all what I thought, and the generator is 46% efficient. The figure of 46% refers to the steam energy going in (187 G Cal per hour) and the electrical energy coming out (86 G Cal per hour), so 86/187 is about 0.46. This means I know virtually nothing about the efficiency of the generator magnet itself, which is a small part of the whole contraption, so the other guesses are more reliable, and more relevant. In short, the answer I gave, "quite high," seems to stand up well :). [[Special:Contributions/203.221.127.63|203.221.127.63]] ([[User talk:203.221.127.63|talk]]) 17:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Mortality rates expressed as hazard rates ==

Does anyone know where I could find [[mortality rate]]s calculated as [[hazard rate]]s? I'm trying to answer questions like, if a [[Canada|Canadian]] man makes it to the age of 93, what are his odds of surviving to 94? If an [[United States|American]] [[baby]] reaches the age of 6 months, what are the odds of her surviving the remainder of her childhood? Thanks. [[User:Moink|moink]] ([[User talk:Moink|talk]]) 12:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:I once did a similar analysis on South African mortality rates and I used [[Statistics South Africa]] for the data so I would presume that the [[United States Census Bureau]] would be able to help you for US data. Do you know how to calculate the probabilities you need from [[Life table|actuarial tables]]? Also, see [[force of mortality]] which is the hazard rate in [[survival analysis]] with respect to mortality. [[User:Zain Ebrahim111|Zain Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Zain Ebrahim111|talk]]) 13:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::Thank you! I think I just needed the term to search for. [[User:Moink|moink]] ([[User talk:Moink|talk]]) 16:45, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::You're welcome. All the best with your work. [[User:Zain Ebrahim111|Zain Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Zain Ebrahim111|talk]]) 18:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Horrible plastic smell! ==

I bought some plimsolls online from [[River Island]], but they stink of plastic like they're from some crappy discount shoe warehouse.. I've put them outside to air but they still smell awful. I thought I'd ask you clever lot for some advice. Whack on the [[Febreze]]? Air tight container with some [[Bicarbonate of soda]]? Thanks in advance! [[Special:Contributions/79.78.46.84|79.78.46.84]] ([[User talk:79.78.46.84|talk]]) 12:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:You bought some "lines painted on the hull of a ship to help determine displacement and draft"? Where are you planning on using them? There has got to be another definition for that word.... -[[User:SandyJax|SandyJax]] ([[User talk:SandyJax|talk]]) 15:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::Um yes? [[plimsolls]] [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 15:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::(after edit conflict) [[Plimsoll shoe]]s have a very pungent smell of rubber, I've always found, but not plastic which doesn't really smell much. Theres not much you can do about it. It fades with with time, I find. [[User:Fribbler|Fribbler]] ([[User talk:Fribbler|talk]]) 15:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Also see [[wiktionary:plimsoll]] [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 15:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::::My guess would be that this is the culprit [[Thiourea]]. [[Vulcanization]] makes rubber usable, but sulfur is known to combine into truly stinky substances. The thing is that you want to avoid the rubber drying out (which would ruin it.) So the [[Bicarbonate of soda|baking soda]] will eat the smell, but in an airtight container will also [[Desiccation|desiccate]] the rubber which will make it brittle. [[Fragrance oil]] might cover the smell, and you could use some [[Odor Eaters|activated charcoal]] insoles. [[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 16:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::::Maybe your <s>posh</s> expensive plimsolls from River island were made in a [[sweatshop]] just like the ones from a "crappy discount shoe warehouse"? [[User:Astronaut|Astronaut]] ([[User talk:Astronaut|talk]]) 16:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== A doubt ==


How does one cite matter from a chapter in a book that has contributors that are different from the editors mentioned on the cover and elsewhere? Which all authors are to be included in the citation?

Kindly help me with this doubt.

Thanks in advance.

Regards.

PS: Have posted the same query on the talk page of citations, but am not expecting a quick reply. Thanks.


<span style="font: small-caps 15px times;">'''[[User:KC Panchal|<font color="#8A2BE2">—Ketan</font><font color="#000000">Panchal</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:KC Panchal|<font color="#2F4F4F">''<small>t</small>aL<big>K</big>''</font>]]'''</sup></span> 13:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:I would err on the side of more information, listing both the chapter's editors as well as the editors of the entire book. Roughly working from [http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/557/06/ the MLA guidelines], "Works with Multiple Authors" should list the individual author first, followed by the group:
Heller, Steven, ed. The Education of an E-Designer.
Heller, Steven and Karen Pomeroy. Design Literacy: Understanding Graphic Design.
:Hopefully this example helps. [[User:Nimur|Nimur]] ([[User talk:Nimur|talk]]) 14:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Incidentally, that's not how you cite chapter authors. Chapters are cited separately and then in the same citation you cite the main work and note the editors. E.g. Paul, Diane B. (2003), "Darwin, social Darwinism and eugenics", in Hodge, Jonathan and Radick, Gregory, eds., ''The Cambridge Companion to Darwin'', Cambridge University Press, 214–239--[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 15:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks Nimur, for your reply. But, my doubt was more about the technical aspect since I'd never seen the {{tl|cite book}} in its expanded form, had only seen its abbreviated form at [[WP:Citation templates]]. Surprisingly, I got my doubt cleared at the talk page of citations itself! Bye. Take care. <span style="font: small-caps 15px times;">'''[[User:KC Panchal|<font color="#8A2BE2">—Ketan</font><font color="#000000">Panchal</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:KC Panchal|<font color="#2F4F4F">''<small>t</small>aL<big>K</big>''</font>]]'''</sup></span> 14:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Optimal nap/sleep time ==

I've read somewhere that if you're not having a full night's sleep, or if you're just taking a nap, certain sleep durations are better than others because you'll not be waking up during the "wrong" part of the sleep cycle. I think two recommended durations were given in the article I read, one for short naps and the other for longer sleep.

I can't find the article and don't remember what the recommended durations are. Can someone point me to some good articles/resources on the subject? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.162.242.15|71.162.242.15]] ([[User talk:71.162.242.15|talk]]) 16:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: [[Power nap]] doesn't state a duration, but you might get that in the original NIMH study cited. --[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 17:11, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Shindo earthquake scale ==

When measuring earthquakes there are different sclaes, like [[Mercalli intensity scale]] and [[Richter magnitude scale]]. Why did the Japanese invent their own scale "shindo" ([[Japan Meteorological Agency seismic intensity scale]]) (In Japanese called 震度)? [[User:Moberg|Moberg]] ([[User talk:Moberg|talk]]) 16:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:As the article's lede notes, the Japanese scale serves a function distinct from that of the Richter scale (and, for that matter, it predates the Richter). The Mercalli scale serves a similar purpose, but again postdates the Japanese scale (1902 vs 1884). &mdash; [[User talk :Lomn|Lomn]] 17:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::("lede", what does it mean?) Ah okey, predates, thanks! But why is the Japanese the ones who made their own scale and not China or Australia or some other country? [[User:Moberg|Moberg]] ([[User talk:Moberg|talk]]) 18:55, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:::(lede is an alternative spelling of lead and refers to the beginning of an article) --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 19:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::::(ok! :)) Follow-up-question: I think that Taiwan uses this scale or a similar one. Is there any other other countries that uses the shindo- (or a from the shindo-scale derived) scale? And if so, why? [[User:Moberg|Moberg]] ([[User talk:Moberg|talk]]) 19:24, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Original rotation of solar system. ==

Under the Nebular Hypothesis, the rotation of the solar system is caused by the contraction of the original cloud and, as it condensed, the rotation went from perhaps once every million years to that which it is today. The principle of the conservation of angular momentum is applied. The question is, however, what caused the original rotation? Any generally accepted reasons for the cause under this hypothesis, or are we still guessing?[[User:Boblaw1|Boblaw1]] ([[User talk:Boblaw1|talk]]) 17:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:I don't think you need anything to cause it - chances are, when you add together the angular momenta of all the particles in the cloud, you're going to get something non-zero, the chance of all the random movements cancelling out exactly is vanishingly small. That tiny, but non-zero, value is then increased dramatically when the cloud collapses. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 18:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:It's in the nature of gravitational capture for things to orbit around each other. Even if the whole cloud were to magically stop spinning, the next thing to wander close enough to start orbiting it would make the system be rotating again. --[[User:TotoBaggins|Sean]] 13:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Nuclear reactors and fissile materials ==

What distinguishes the following technologies?
*Uranium enrichment
*Plutonium reprocessing
*Graphite reactor
*Light water reactor
*Heavy water reactor
--[[Special:Contributions/141.161.98.180|141.161.98.180]] ([[User talk:141.161.98.180|talk]]) 18:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:Might they all be distinguished by being the subject of homework questions? [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 19:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:We have Wikipedia articles on each of those. [[Uranium enrichment]], [[nuclear reprocessing]], [[graphite moderated reactor]], [[light water reactor]], [[heavy water reactor]]. The different reactor types use different [[neutron moderator]]s (which has different implications for what type of fuel you put in them and what types of products you get out in the end), uranium enrichment is about increasing the percentage of U-235 in a given sample of uranium, reprocessing is about taking [[spent fuel]] and getting out certain materials created by the fission reactions (such as plutonium). For more details, read the articles. --[[User:Captain Ref Desk|Captain Ref Desk]] ([[User talk:Captain Ref Desk|talk]]) 19:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Diodes ==

what exactly will happen when we short two terminals of a common type of diode ,does there be any charge movement and a resulting effect on depletion region[[Special:Contributions/202.125.143.75|202.125.143.75]] ([[User talk:202.125.143.75|talk]]) 19:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:Presuming that the diode was not connected to a circuit then probably nothing since unlike say a capacitor, I'm pretty sure a diode doesn't keep a charge. If the diode is connected to a circuit, then I believe shorting it will basically remove any potential affect the diode may have [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 19:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
::A [[reverse-biased]] diode does effectively act like a small capacitor, storing a tiny amount of charge. I don't suppose most diodes have enough [[capacitance]] for it to have any measurable effect in practice, but apparently some do: see [[varicap]]. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 21:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

::I am guessing that the questioner is thinking that shorting the ends of a diode together will have some effect of connecting the P-type side of the diode to the N-type side. However, they are already connected in the P-N junction inside the diode. Connecting them again will have no effect. By bringing up the depletion region, the questioner is implying that the diode is in a circuit and has current passing through it. Shorting out the terminals in that case will mean that you have a parallel circuit. The short has a resistance of nearly 0 ohms. The diode is commonly treated as having 0 ohm resistance, but that is not true. The good ones are 300 ohms (if my memory from circuit design 15 years ago is correct). So, until the current surpasses the capability of the short, there will be basically no current in the diode. The depletion region will quickly dissipate. If you take a good electronics course, this is the type of problem you'll see on a final: At 0.02 seconds after shorting out the diode, what is the potential difference between the terminals? -- [[User:Kainaw|<font color='#ff0000'>k</font><font color='#cc0033'>a</font><font color='#990066'>i</font><font color='#660099'>n</font><font color='#3300cc'>a</font><font color='#0000ff'>w</font>]][[User talk:Kainaw|&trade;]] 21:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Electronics home project ==

Well I would like to build a switch which is switched on and off by clapping your hands twice. What do I need, and how do I do it? [[User:Bastard Soap|Bastard Soap]] ([[User talk:Bastard Soap|talk]]) 20:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:You can order a kit to build a sound-activated switch (which seems to cost exactly the same as [[The Clapper]]). [http://www.electronickits.com/kit/complete/elec/ck1607.htm This page] also has a link to a PDF version of the assembly manual which includes a theory of operation section. --[[User:LarryMac|<font color="#3EA99F">LarryMac</font>]][[User talk:LarryMac|<font color="#3EA99F"><small> | Talk</small></font>]] 20:41, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:: Or order everything separately [http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://fowkc.net/elec/clapper/ClapperComplete_thumb.JPG&imgrefurl=http://fowkc.net/elec/clapper.php&h=432&w=576&sz=65&hl=en&start=2&um=1&tbnid=Js9JKFoVzUL5sM:&tbnh=101&tbnw=134&prev=/images%3Fq%3DDIY%2Bclapper%2Bcircuit%2Bdiagram%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rlz%3D1G1GGLQ_ENXX250%26as_qdr%3Dall] (This doesn't have to be cheaper in the end. I've had a couple of DIY projects that added up to more in parts than the thing off the shelf. Less fun buying it, though.) Be sure to follow local code in all projects involving home installations! Have a licensed electrician check any circuit before connecting to your house electricity. (No advice, but if you burn down the house your insurance won't pay and your spouse will never shut up about it.)--[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 22:55, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Nuclear Power Plant on "automatic mode" ==

In the event of a hypothetical [[doomsday]] scenario how long would a modern nuclear power plant be able to supply electricity before it shuts down? I know an that nuclear power plant's have some kind of [[dead man's handle]] mechanism as a [[failsafe]] but let's assume that it was turned off. How long could a modern nuclear power plant work on it's own? For hours, days, weeks or years? [[User:Mieciu K|Mieciu K]] ([[User talk:Mieciu K|talk]]) 21:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:Hours would be easy, and days would be likely. Weeks would be a stretch. This assumes that the system has some sort of automatic load following, or that the load on the generator remains constant. so it just has to do steady-state operation. If "doomsday" meant that the load dropped abruptly or that it dropped gradually and there was no load following, the generator would trip followed by the shutdown of the reactor. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 23:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:(Caveat: I'm only an expert on US Navy nuclear propulsion systems) Think of your car's engine. Things happen inside the engine too fast for a human to contol, so we automate things like lubrication, fuel and air intake, and valve timing. Whether controlled by a carburetor or an electronic fuel injection system, there is an automated control system that looks at system outputs like speed, exhaust temperature, and exhaust chemistry, and adjusts system inputs like fuel and air to maintain whatever it was preset to. Completely separate from that, there is a system that looks at lube oil pressure, and adjusts oil flow to keep that constant (that system is pretty simple; it's just a dump valve attached to a spring, so if oil pressure rises the valve opens more, dumping more oil back to the sump, etc). If you walk away from your car after you start the engine, what happens? It stays running until something goes wrong beyond the capacity of the control system. The engine will shut down when the fuel tank runs empty and fuel pressure drops to the point where the injectors or carburetors can't compensate. The engine will shut down if the car is in an enclosed space like a garage, and the oxygen concentration goes down to the point that it won't support combustion any more. The engine will shut down if a part breaks. The engine will shut down badly if it runs out of oil. Etc, etc, etc.
:Now, with that in mind, let's look at a reactor plant. Again, nuclear reactions happen too fast for a human to control, so there are completely automated systems that make minor adjustments to keep the plant running at whatever settings the operators decide. Of course, there are very stringent limits on what the operators are allowed to decide. Some limits are set by the physicists who designed the reactor, some are set by the engineers who designed the steam plant the reactor is there to drive, some limits are set by government safety analysts who want to prevent accidents, and some limits are set by the Navy's operational needs.
:However, if started up within those limits, a reactor plant will run on it's own until something happens that the control system can't handle. To the best of my knowledge, there is no "Dead man switch" that would make the plant shut down - and cause a regional blackout - just because there's a flu bug going around and all the operators had to run to the bathroom at the same time. That's the whole point of the automated systems - the humans look for trends, while the machinery runs itself.
:Running out of fuel isn't a problem for several years, perhaps decades, depending upon fuel level. Fuel poison buildup shouldn't be a problem for a plant designed to run at full capacity for years at a time, as an electric generator plant would be; that would be factored into the design and the control system would compensate. Leakage shouldn't be a problem, either, as the nuclear side is designed to not leak, and minor leaks would be compensated for by an automated makeup system.
:Any reason for the plant to shut down if the operators "just walked away" would come from the steam plant and electric generator side. Again, an electric generator plant would be designed to automatically compensate for changes in load, because they happen too fast for humans to follow. And, if we assume that nothing breaks, and no turbines run out of lube oil, and the river keeps providing cooling water, the reactor plant will keep providing electricity until the electric load on the grid drops to below minimum power. Another point. These plants generally have more than one of everything. More than one core, more than one turbine, more than one oil pump for each turbine, etc, simply because we are aware that things break, and we don't want to have a blackout just because an oil pump broke.
:We can figure that the coal-fired and oil-fired plants will fail first, because no one refilled the coal hoppers and fuel tanks. Still, the hydro-electric plants and nuclear plants will have no problem with the remaining load, because there's no people left anymore, so there's not much using electricity. Major system loads will be automated lights for cities and highways and other things like that that turn themselves on. And, if a plant that is fueled for, say, five years at full power finds itself only running at ten percent power, well, then, it has enough fuel to run for 50 years at THAT power level.
:Eventually, though, some random storm will down some power lines, and the transformer farm will isolate itself from the grid to protect itself, and _then_ the power plant will find itself running with no load. The steam plant can run at idle, just waiting for someone to shut the breakers again. but the reactor can't. Those fission by-product poisons we dismissed earlier DO have an effect. It's minor compared to the rest of the reactor running under full load, but when running at idle they have an effect that adds up. They will continue to contribute heat, and the control system will throttle back the fission process, until it is forced to shut the plant down. Safely, automatically, with no people involved. At least, that's the way US Navy plants are designed. When will that happen? Who knows? A day, a month, 5 years? Can't tell. But the nuclear and hydro plants will stay running until some outside factor makes them shutdown. -[[User:SandyJax|SandyJax]] ([[User talk:SandyJax|talk]]) 14:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

: There was a straight dope "staff report" on this subject as well. [http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mzombiepower.html] [[User:APL|APL]] ([[User talk:APL|talk]]) 16:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== List of Physics equations ==

We have a page which lists lots of trigonmetric equations. Is there a similar page for physics equations. In particular "v = u + at", "s = ut + 0.5at^2", "F = ma", etc. Maybe also for electrical equations "V = IR" "Q = VC" etc. If it does exist you can't find it by searching for "v=u+at". -- [[User:SGBailey|SGBailey]] ([[User talk:SGBailey|talk]]) 22:24, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:We have [[list of equations]] (not all Physics), [[list of relativistic equations]] and [[list of equations in classical mechanics]] (this one has the constant acceleration equations, but I think the TeX stops search working). [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 22:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Logic gates ==

I was mulling over how to make demonstration logic gates using many different technologies. Obviously a mechanical AND gate can be made with two input levers which can be up or down pushing on opposite ends of a floating pivoted beam where the central pivot holds a flagpole. If both are down, the pole is down, if only one is up the the beam pivots and the pole is down, if both are up then the beam itself is raised and hence the pole is up. What other technologies are there and how might they be demonstrated? Hydraulic (liquid pressure?); Pneumatic (flow (or not)); electromechanical (relays); electronic (transistors and voltages); Pure optical (no idea how); Magnetic (how?), etc etc. Suggestions and advice on a postcard please... -- [[User:SGBailey|SGBailey]] ([[User talk:SGBailey|talk]]) 22:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:Our school used to have a cool board with chutes, marbles and switches that switched LEDs on/off. --[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 23:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

: Here's an idea for an optical OR gate. Light shines down both tubes, but each one may be blocked by a piece of cardboard. Where the tubes combine is some sort of prism/two-way mirror set-up that combines the two beams together and sends it down the bottom tube. If one tube or the other is open, or if both are, then there will be light coming out the bottom.

| | | |
| | | |
-+----+- -+----+-
| | | |
| |_________| |
\ * * /
\ * * /
\ * * /
\ * * /
\ * * /
\* */
| |
| |

: I think that perhaps to make a XOR gate you could consider how to make a NOT XNOR gate first - pick a medium that involves something flowing (like water, or sand), and let each switch divert the flow in opposite directions somehow. So having neither, or both on, lets the flow continue as it was, while having just one diverts it (into a secondary channel, say). You can then turn that all around, and make that secondary channel the primary one, and you've got a XOR. [[User:ConMan|Confusing Manifestation]]<small>([[User talk:ConMan|Say hi!]])</small> 23:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

::Hmm. Yes. Remember that all logic operations can be built from [[NAND]] or [[Logical NOR|NOR]] if you are really desperate. --[[User:Prestidigitator|Prestidigitator]] ([[User talk:Prestidigitator|talk]]) 01:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:::Please be sure to see [[fluidics]]. Also, [[Tinkertoy computer]] [http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~cfs/472_html/Intro/TinkertoyComputer/TinkerToy.html] [http://www.retrothing.com/2006/12/the_tinkertoy_c.html].

:::[[User:Atlant|Atlant]] ([[User talk:Atlant|talk]]) 15:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== How to calculate minimum wind speed to cause white caps on ocean ==

[[User:Wiklearn|Wiklearn]] ([[User talk:Wiklearn|talk]]) 23:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)How is wind speed related to the height of ocean waves? At what wind speed would white caps appear? [[User:Wiklearn|Wiklearn]] ([[User talk:Wiklearn|talk]]) 23:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:You might try looking at [[Beaufort scale]]—in particular, the table that relates Beaufort numbers to wind speeds and to surface conditions on the open ocean. [[User:Deor|Deor]] ([[User talk:Deor|talk]]) 13:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Definition for trompe on wikipedia please ==

Trompes are simple devices that use the power of falling water to compress air.
Trompes were used widely in the 19th century. They were used to provide the air for mines, blast furnaces pneumatic tools for alpine tunnel making, etc.
The town of Cobalt in Ontario, Canada claims to have the only hydraulic air compressor (Trompe) left in the world http://www.cobalt.ca/ragged_chutes.htm
Researchers in England have tried to use low pressure trompes (attached to an enclosed wind turbine and electric generator) to extract energy from the water running over weirs in a cost effective way. (Pdf is available if required).
I believe that a dedfinition of trompe would help show people in poor countrys that energy is available from low grade (low head) hydro sources without the huge investment in machinery that is currently a barrier to using these (often high volume) sources of energy. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Gaiatechnician|Gaiatechnician]] ([[User talk:Gaiatechnician|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Gaiatechnician|contribs]]) 23:46, 29 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->[[User:Gaiatechnician|Gaiatechnician]] ([[User talk:Gaiatechnician|talk]]) 23:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

:Not sure what you're driving at, but have you looked at "[[Trompe]]"? --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 01:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC) Thank you but at the top it says "This article does not cite any references or sources. (November 2006)
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed". I actually wrote it and my poor effort has been sitting there with that proviso (and doubt) over it for a long time. Just hoping to get it fixed. My sources are long ago photocopys from engineering manuals. I have made some so I know they exist. [[User:Gaiatechnician|Gaiatechnician]] ([[User talk:Gaiatechnician|talk]]) 15:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:Ah. Now I see. That message about sources is just Wikipedia houskeeping. It serves two purposes, basically, the way I understand it: to warn the reader that there is no proof of the accuracy of the information, and to flag the article for possible deletion if it sits like that too long. Your concern is jusatified, I think. This is the Reference Desk, I'm sure you know, and it is not the right place for announcements of this type (though I think you will have gotten the attention of people who have the knowledge to fix the article). You should try the talk pages of whatever WikiProjects are concerned with things like trompes, for instance, [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Engineering]] and [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Technology]]. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 15:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Such devices have existed. Within the last year there was an article in New Scientist showing methods of using low-head flow to compress air. The water flowed in the shape of a U taking air bubbles down to the submerged air reservoir in the middle. The water leaves at a lower level.[[User:Polypipe Wrangler|Polypipe Wrangler]] ([[User talk:Polypipe Wrangler|talk]]) 10:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

= May 30 =

== Adipocere smell ==

Hello,
My question is about Adipocere aka, grave wax.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adipocere

A friend of mine sent me a hunk of it, part of a woodchuck that had been trapped in an old well. It was in a zip-lock bag, which sat on a of table of hats and gloves waiting to be put away after a long Alaskan winter.

The smell of the Adipocers seeped out of the zip-lock bag, and stuck to the hat and gloves. It washed out, but how/why can it get though plastic. And stick to anything, including my hands, and some how I could not get the smell of it out of my nose for a long time. Why? Thank you for your time.

[[User:Art4u|Art4u]] ([[User talk:Art4u|talk]]) 02:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


:The larger question is why a "friend" would send someone a hunk of dead woodchuck. It seems of little use, other than for pranks I described then thought better of per [[WP:BEANS]] and did not post. Serial killers have had similar problems when they leave their victims in the crawlspace of their home. Perhaps you should have covered the plastic bag of dead woodchuck with six feet of earth or a layer of concrete. If you had left it outside during the Alaskan winter, would it have more likely attracted or repelled Grizzly bears when they emerged from hibernation? Crime novels and some forensicsources[http://books.google.com/books?id=5ZXt-aJlmX4C&pg=PA219&lpg=PA219&dq=VapoRub+corpse&source=web&ots=u2LKuTKc-V&sig=m0k5pMajJVMKdwam5HBclwMa-yg&hl=en] describe police and pathologists placing a bit of [[Vicks#VapoRub]] under theis nostrils when dealing with stinky corpses, and some sources also say it helps with adipocere [http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&ie=utf8&oe=utf8&q=VapoRub+adipocere] [http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&ie=utf8&oe=utf8&q=VapoRub+adipocere] but we do not offer medical advice. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 03:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:: Erm, where's is the medical problem that requires medical advice? I would postulate that the apodocere has a fat based intense odour that produces some sort of particularly persistent and/or adherent molecules that have lodged in the nose and continue to cause the smell. Yes, I realise that individual molecules are required to stimulate the olfactory plate but show me another possibility. With regard to the seeping of odour through a plastic bag this is a well known phenomenon in certain plastics, the actual mechanism of the migration of the smell at molecular level is not known to me. [[User:Richard Avery|Richard Avery]] ([[User talk:Richard Avery|talk]]) 07:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== COOLING TOWER EVAPORATION ==

WHAT IS THE BASIS OF EVAPORATION CALCULATION IN COUNTER FLOW COOLING TOWERS ? WHAT ARE THE UNITS USED FOR LATENT HEAT OF EVAPORATION? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/59.182.38.14|59.182.38.14]] ([[User talk:59.182.38.14|talk]]) 03:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:We don't do your homework here. [[User:Chris Mason|Chris M.]] ([[User talk:Chris Mason|talk]]) 04:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::Hi. True, we don't do others' homework here, but we can at least help the asker by posting some links to help. Thanks. ~<font color="blue">[[User:AstroHurricane001/A|A]][[User:AstroHurricane001|H]][[User:AstroHurricane001/D|1]]</font><sup>([[User:AstroHurricane001/T|T]][[Special:Contributions/AstroHurricane001|C]][[User:AstroHurricane001/U|U]])</sup> 17:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== CHEMISTRY ==

PLEASE EXPLAIN THE INDUSTRIAL PREPARATION OF THE FOLLOWING ORGANIC COMPOUND
(a). Ethene
(b). Propene <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Frankdinero|Frankdinero]] ([[User talk:Frankdinero|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Frankdinero|contribs]]) 03:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:You might want to check out [[Ethene]] and [[Propene]]. [[User:Paragon12321|Paragon12321]] ([[User talk:Paragon12321|talk]]) 03:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Burning stomach fat with an ab machine ==

I recently saw a commercial for one of those ab machines, the kind that facilitates crunches. Naturally, it included before-and-after pictures of people who lost lots of fat around their stomachs in "just 30 days!"

Of course doing crunches would strengthen and define one's abdominal muscles. But in regard to burning fat in specifically the area around the stomach—does the body burn fat stored in a certain area faster if the muscles around that area are exercised? In other words, say that two identical people each expended a certain amount of energy during workouts, but one did crunches and one did, say, cardio. Would the first person's body burn more fat around the stomach than the second person's, or does the body have its own set order as to which fat deposits it burns? --[[User:Zenohockey|zenohockey]] ([[User talk:Zenohockey|talk]]) 04:15, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:Theres no such thing as spot fat reduction unfortunately. So the only way to get abs is have a really low body fat % (for most people). [[Special:Contributions/61.69.132.119|61.69.132.119]] ([[User talk:61.69.132.119|talk]]) 04:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

::Well, there is [[liposuction]] for "spot fat reduction"...

::[[User:Atlant|Atlant]] ([[User talk:Atlant|talk]]) 15:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:::Look at this [[http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=50704]], particularly at the "Battling the Bulge" section where they describe that walking a mile burns 120 calories. What you can lose in 30 days is water. You also might find this article interesting [http://discovermagazine.com/2007/feb/visceral-fat/article_view?b_start:int=2&-C=] Crash exercising isn't that great, because you [[Microtrauma|tear your muscles]] if you subject them to a lot more work all of a sudden. --[[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 00:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

==Battery question, part II==
Thanks to everyone who answered my question earlier, your comments were very helpful. So (in summary) the main consideration with batteries, in terms of the electronics that use them, is the voltage they produce.
And now, operating on this premise, I am going to raise a few eyebrows. What would be the feasibility of using a series of common batteries (e.g., C or AA) to power my laptop? Bare question there, again hypothetical. For reference, the power adapter for my laptop says it gives the laptop 20v at 3.5A and 70W. [[Special:Contributions/63.224.79.202|63.224.79.202]] ([[User talk:63.224.79.202|talk]]) 04:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:Possible, but not really feasible. Let's take AAs. It'll take 13 in series to make 20v. The AAs I have sitting around list at just under 3000 [[Ampere-hour|mAh]], which means those batteries will run that laptop (at peak power) for about an hour. Supposing that the laptop's standard battery lasts 4 hours, that means you need 52 AAs to duplicate its functionality. Those are the single-use ones. Go to rechargeables and the mAh rating drops to about 2000, which means you're looking at about 75 AAs to replace the laptop battery. Larger batteries (say, D cells) will have a higher mAh rating -- about 10000 mAh for rechargeables, or 16000 for single-use. That means you'd only need 13 single-use D-cells instead of the 52 AAs, though Ds cost about 4 times as much (if not more) per battery. &mdash; [[User talk :Lomn|Lomn]] 05:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::Wow, so it would actually work. How would one hook that up? (Now I'm asking for trouble) [[Special:Contributions/63.224.79.202|63.224.79.202]] ([[User talk:63.224.79.202|talk]]) 05:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Connect them in [[Series_and_parallel_circuits#Series_circuits|series]], you will also need the same type plug (which plugs into laptop) as for laptops power supply (in worst case it could be connected directly, but it would require disassembly of device). -[[User:Yyy|Yyy]] ([[User talk:Yyy|talk]]) 10:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

NB: Doing this could easily void your warranty - especially if you have to take the laptop apart to get it connected up. While it's a nice theoretical idea, I advise against actually attempting it. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 12:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:If device is not taken apart, then only problem with this would be undervoltage, when batteries will run out (i am not sure if computers is able to accept reduced voltages from power supply). If power plug is taken from pawer supply, it might void warranty for power supply. This method probably will not be efficient, because laptop computers usually consumes considerable amount of electricity, and batteries are expensive (if you have unlimited access to free batteries, then this is not an issue). -[[User:Yyy|Yyy]] ([[User talk:Yyy|talk]]) 14:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:Also, if batteries are connected in place of original laptop battery, these would need nome sort of smart battery chip emulation (it might be complicated). Laptop batteries usually have lower voltages (11-14V) and this power interface should be able to deal with reduced voltages better (when batteries are running out). -[[User:Yyy|Yyy]] ([[User talk:Yyy|talk]]) 15:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

::I'm not sure if I've seen such a device for laptops, but for [[mobile phone]]s, [[iPod]]s, and the like, you can definitely buy commercial devices that let you use one-time-use (primary) batteries to power the gadget. And years and years ago, I had a flat-pack external [[lead-acid battery]] that connected to the power-inlet jack of my [[PowerBook 170]] laptop computer. That battery was sized to match the outline of the laptop and added (maybe) a 1/4" to the thickness of the laptop, but doubled (+/-) the run-time of the laptop. Another gadget I had for the laptop allowed you to connect an external '''9V''' rectangular-cell battery to the laptop's power-inlet jack. This wasn't enough to operate the laptop, but it allowed the laptop to keep sleeping even while you exchanged the laptop's discharged main battery for a fresh one. (Later, Apple built a small NiCd cell into their laptops to perform the same function: sleeping through a battery change.)

::[[User:Atlant|Atlant]] ([[User talk:Atlant|talk]]) 15:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:::You can simply take a 4AA battery pack and an USB extension cord, connect the two terminals to the two power cables in the USB cord and charge your iPod off that. The iPod has quite a big tolerance on input voltage so you can charge it with car batteries, lantern batteries etc. as well. --[[User: Antilived|antilived]]<sup>[[User_talk:Antilived|T]] | [[Special:Contributions/Antilived|C]] | [[User:Antilived/Gallery|G]]</sup> 00:00, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== hens eggs ==

is it possible to freeze eggsand for how long <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/84.48.90.44|84.48.90.44]] ([[User talk:84.48.90.44|talk]]) 04:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

if we can freeze human eggs we can freeze chicken eggs i'm sure. now are you talking about fertilized eggs or unfertilized eggs or are you talking about chicken ova for the purpose of later insemination. if the former two, for what purpose, eating or breeding? if its for food yes you can freeze eggs, they just don't taste very well when you thaw them out. i would suggest you only boil them afterwards.` <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Myheartinchile|Myheartinchile]] ([[User talk:Myheartinchile|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Myheartinchile|contribs]]) 06:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:It's probably not possible to freeze them in their shells, but for commercial use, restaurants commonly buy plastic bags containing the frozen, scrambled contents of a hundred eggs. That's the quickest way to crank out [[omelette]]s by the dozens. I'd imagine the same process (on a smaller scale) could be done at home. (This has come up on the Reference Desk before, BTW.)

:[[User:Atlant|Atlant]] ([[User talk:Atlant|talk]]) 15:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== abreva for genital hsv2 treatment ==

can you somebody use a product such as abreva to alleviate or quicken the healing of genital (HSV1 not HSV2) fever blisters/cold sores? If not abreva then what? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Myheartinchile|Myheartinchile]] ([[User talk:Myheartinchile|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Myheartinchile|contribs]]) 06:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

I'm sorry but we can't give medical advice.--[[User:Lenticel|<span style="color: teal; background: white; font-weight: bold">Lenticel</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Lenticel|<span style="color: green; font-weight: bold">talk</span>]])</sup> 09:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

This isn't a medical inquiry, its a research one for my human sexuality class. and also out of curiousity. the articles on abreva and genital herpes didn't answer my question neither did web searches or a call to a health center. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Myheartinchile|Myheartinchile]] ([[User talk:Myheartinchile|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Myheartinchile|contribs]]) 01:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Huh? I'm no expert, but "abreva" redirects to [[Docosanol]] <small>quote</small> ''used mainly as an antiviral agent, specifically for treatment of "cold sores" caused by the herpes simplex virus.'' <small>unquote</small> An here's the wikipedia magic: click on [[herpes simplex virus]] and it will get you to an article that starts out with ''Herpes simplex virus 1 and 2 (HSV-1 and HSV-2)'' I have no clue what you were looking for, but this seems to cover what you asked about. --[[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 04:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== chemistry - material science ==

1.How pH affects the particle size in a chemical reaction ?

2. Explain the properties of Polyethylene glycol (PEG) ?

3.Give the actual definitions of Acid and Base ( Not basing on theories ) ? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Auap|Auap]] ([[User talk:Auap|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Auap|contribs]]) 06:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

3 media of amplitude can be expressed in keyboards, per [[Keyboard_expression]]. Are there any others, and if so, could you list them all?

Also, for all possible, probable and theoretical instruments, can you list and explain all forms of amplitude expression?[[Special:Contributions/68.148.164.166|68.148.164.166]] ([[User talk:68.148.164.166|talk]]) 08:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

::We do not do your homework, we can only point you in the right directions on Wikipedia and, assuming you make an attempt at solving them yourself, help you out where you may be wrong or stuck. [[User:Scaller|Scaller]] ([[User talk:Scaller|talk]]) 09:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Some weired homework that would be! I think this is genuine.

1) As far as I know it doesn't, How could PH change the size of a particle?

2) See our article [[Polyethylene glycol]]

3) I don't know what you want here. What do you mean by "not based on theories"? [[User:Theresa knott|Theresa Knott]] | [[User talk:Theresa knott|The otter sank]] 15:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:::"[[Acid|An acid (often represented by the generic formula HA [H+A-]) is traditionally considered any chemical compound that, when dissolved in water, gives a solution with a hydrogen ion activity greater than in pure water, i.e. a pH less than 7.0.]]"

:::"[[Base (chemistry)|In chemistry, a base is most commonly thought of as a substance that can accept protons. This refers to the Brønsted-Lowry theory of acids and bases. Alternate definitions of bases include electron pair donors (Lewis), as sources of hydroxide anions (Arrhenius) and can be (commonly) thought of as any chemical compound that, when dissolved in water, gives a solution with a pH higher than 7.0. Examples of simple bases are sodium hydroxide and ammonia.]]"

:::Hope that helps. Regards, <font face="Tahoma" size="2px">'''[[User:Cyclonenim|CycloneNimrod]]'''</font><font size="1px"><sup>[[User_talk:Cyclonenim|Talk?]]</sup></font> 16:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:An acid can [[coagulate]] a [[colloid]], due to the charge changing on the colloidal particles. For example, add acid to milk and it will go thick and lumpy, onthe road to cheese. [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 22:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== SPACE ==

WHY DO OBJECTS GET SMALL WHEN TRAVELING NEAR THE SPEED OF LIGHT IN SPACE [[Special:Contributions/59.88.65.80|59.88.65.80]] ([[User talk:59.88.65.80|talk]]) 09:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:Those objects that get smaller are most likely moving away from you. They occupy less and less of your field of vision. Was this a clever troll, meant to inspire the questions of many a confused theoretician not aware of the most logical and sound explanation? I will assume good intent. [[User:Scaller|Scaller]] ([[User talk:Scaller|talk]]) 09:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::I think the question is regarding [[Length contraction]] also known as Lorentz contraction. It is for the same reason as time slows down relative to an outside observer in order to maintain the constancy of the speed of light. [[User:Jdrewitt|Jdrewitt]] ([[User talk:Jdrewitt|talk]]) 10:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:::(Scaller) Oh, then the impression of decreasing size (versus lengthening, that seems an increase) mislead me. Thank you. :) [[Special:Contributions/81.93.102.185|81.93.102.185]] ([[User talk:81.93.102.185|talk]]) 09:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:The core tenet of [[Special Relativity]] is that the speed of light will always been measured as constant by any observers (it is invariant), but all other things will be measured relatively based on the reference frame of the observer (they are relative). As a result, when you start doing talking about things which move at or near light speed, the only way for the very large speed of light to be measured as constant by other observers is you start seeing both time and space as being relative, as actually changing. You don't ''have'' to see things as getting small at the speed of light; you can see them as occurring at very different times than what the person inside that fast-moving frame would say. The reason why time and space seem relative is due to how we measure both time and space—how we define what length is, what an interval of time is, both are dependent on measurements of the speed of light. Make any sense? --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 15:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:::''There once was a [[Fencing|fencer]] named Fisk''
:::''Whose stroke was exceedingly brisk.''
:::''So fast was his action''
:::''the [[Length contraction|Fitzgerald contraction]]''
:::''reduced his [[rapier]] to a disk.''

::[[User:Atlant|Atlant]] ([[User talk:Atlant|talk]]) 15:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Canthaxanthin concentration in Cantharellus cinnabarinus ==

What is the concentration of [[canthaxanthin]] in ''[[Cantharellus cinnabarinus]]'' (Wikipedia currently doesn't have an article on it, but on the genus [[Cantharellus]])? The answer can probably found in the [http://www.jstor.org/pss/2472791 original paper of the discovery of canthaxanthin], but I don't have fulltext access - maybe some of you have? Thanks in advance! [[User:Icek|Icek]] ([[User talk:Icek|talk]]) 11:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:They don't provide a concentration figure. Also, they don't provide a good figure for the amount of canthaxanthin recovered, saying only that they got 0.9 mg, plus "a lesser amount" by recrystallization. They also mention "small amounts" of what they think was an isomer of canthaxanthin. I guess the total amount was in the neighborhood of 1 mg. They started with 75 g of mushrooms, so a rough figure for the concentration would be 13μg/g. I had no idea that a pigment could color something at such a low concentration, but that shows what I know, I guess. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 12:13, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:You can ask for fulltext versions of pretty much anything at the [[WP:LIBRARY|Resource Exchange]] so you can read it yourself. Hint to Milkbreath, are you signed up there? ;) [[User:Franamax|Franamax]] ([[User talk:Franamax|talk]]) 17:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== animal colouration ==

why do so many mammals(dog,horses,cats for instance)have a flash of a different colour on their chests?---Jo. Russell <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.13.210.32|86.13.210.32]] ([[User talk:86.13.210.32|talk]]) 12:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: Why questions are always hairy (if you'll excuse the pun :-) [[Animal colouration]] gives 3 main uses for color: concealment, signaling and mimicry. Although it may seem odd, a different color spot can actually help hide an animal. On top of your carpet a tabby cat like the one in [[Camouflage]] would stand out, but look how well the stripes hide it. So the spot could help "break up the pattern" of the animal. It might also signal that "this is the end with the head". To prey it would be useful to know what end of an predator it's facing and a predator would find it useful to know where an animals neck to bite is. (That would however not serve your own survival, so maybe not a likely scenario) It may also just be attractive to mates. (After all an animal can't just throw on a cool T or sassy skirt, but ^o.o^ have you SEEN the one with that spot?) I can't think of a model for [[mimicry]]. Having all those very sensible possible reasons, it's unfortunately just as likely that it's just a bit of gene left over from an ancient ancestor or pure coincidence and doesn't serve any purpose at all. --[[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 21:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:[[Countershading]]? --[[User:Carnildo|Carnildo]] ([[User talk:Carnildo|talk]]) 21:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Can anyone identify this bird? ==

http://pets.webshots.com/photo/1101444074041514092KxzdCz Thanks. :) [[Special:Contributions/99.245.92.47|99.245.92.47]] ([[User talk:99.245.92.47|talk]]) 12:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:I think this is the Crested Coua (''[[Coua cristata]]''), native to Madagascar. Most of the few images that I can find are greyer than shown in your photograph, but the patch of bare blue skin around the eye and the untidy crest seem to match. Here are a few links: [http://farm1.static.flickr.com/189/501695513_6731a9d0f7.jpg?v=0] [http://farm1.static.flickr.com/217/480169519_68f21324b3.jpg?v=0] [http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=12651&rendTypeId=4] [http://ourlives-at-windandsea.info/mediac/400_0/media/DIR_77401/Tana$2C-Zoo-Crested-Coua.jpg]. There is a Blue Coua (''[[Coua caerulea]]''), but it doesn't seem to have much of a crest [http://info.bio.sunysb.edu/rano.biodiv/Birds/Coua-caerulea/BlueCoua-2.jpeg] [http://info.bio.sunysb.edu/rano.biodiv/Birds/Coua-caerulea/BlueCoua.jpeg]. Also, the patch of blue skin around the eye doesn't seem quite right in the Blue Coua--[[User:Eriastrum|Eriastrum]] ([[User talk:Eriastrum|talk]]) 20:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Uncontacted Tribes in Brazil ==

[[http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/05/30/brazil.tribes/index.html]]

From what I think I understand, no one from the outside contacted these remote tribes but does that also mean that they don't know that another world exists from their jungle homes? --[[User:Vincebosma|Vincebosma]] ([[User talk:Vincebosma|talk]]) 13:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:It depends on the context you mean. Take, for example, the ancient Greeks. [[Eratosthenes]] estimated the size of the Earth some 2200 years ago. In that sense, the Greeks were quite aware that far more world existed than they had explored. On the other hand, they would not have been able to imagine the details of, for instance, the [[Maya civilization]]. Similarly, [[uncontacted peoples]] may vary in the degree of knowledge of the rest of the world. &mdash; [[User talk :Lomn|Lomn]] 13:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Hologram monitors? ==

Are there any emerging technologies that replace monitors or TV's with holograms? [[Special:Contributions/65.41.95.198|65.41.95.198]] ([[User talk:65.41.95.198|talk]]) 13:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:Nothing very promising, no. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 14:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

::The [[Bandwidth (computing)|bandwidth]] required for a true "holographic" (volume-filling) display is much, much larger than the bandwidth required for a 2D display. If you need a million [[pixel]]s for a given 2D display, you'd need a '''billion''' [[voxel]]s for the equivalent space-filling display. We also don't yet have a good, cheap mechanism for creating visible voxels in free space. On the other hand, [[Stereoscopy|stereoscopic displays]] are quite practical today and are often used in scientific applications. Because they only represent the stereoscopic view seen from one point in space, they only require about twice the data as a 2D display.

::[[User:Atlant|Atlant]] ([[User talk:Atlant|talk]]) 14:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:The Feb. 7 issue of ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' has a letter on "An updatable holographic three-dimensional display" described in that issue as "a breakthrough". It is a 102-mm square photorefractive polymer that can be rewritten and has a 45-degree horizontal viewing angle, meaning you could walk one-quarter of the way "around" the object. This is the first one ever, and it takes 3 minutes to update the screen, but it's there. I'm not sure if the bandwidth comparison is exactly right, since a holograph encodes the image in a completely different way, but the overview mentions military, medical and video-gamer markets, who are presumably willing to pay for bandwidth. It certainly won't be on the shelves for Christmas though. [[User:Franamax|Franamax]] ([[User talk:Franamax|talk]]) 17:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Have you read the article on [[volumetric display]]? it's not exactly holography but fairly close -[[User:Pierhead|russ]] ([[User talk:Pierhead|talk]]) 22:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:And it's not terribly promising, at least for commercial usage. I don't think any of the methods mentioned on that page have much promise. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 23:44, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

==Orgasms==
I am 17 years old and I have not orgasmed yet... I just had sex for the second time yesterday... And I still can not bring myself to orgasm I masturbate regulary it feels good but I cant bring myself to climax. Even when I cum I don't get that enormous satifactation I hear about from others. What can I do? [[User:JenJenAndAway|JenJenAndAway]] ([[User talk:JenJenAndAway|talk]]) 13:44, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:How do you qualify "enormous satisfaction"? It's impossible to know what feeling another person gets from something beyond their expression/descriptions of it. Are your peers over-exaggerating? Are you expecting too much? Generally 'cumming' is a way of describing the act of orgasm (certainly for males), so in the second part it suggests you have already orgasmed before. The obvious options open to you are to experiment and try different ways to get yourself in that state. It sounds more like a mental, rather than physical issue from what you've said. If in doubt then see a doctor/medical professional who may be able to help you further. [[Special:Contributions/194.221.133.226|194.221.133.226]] ([[User talk:194.221.133.226|talk]]) 14:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you stop worrying about it. If it feels good, your doing it right! [[User:Theresa knott|Theresa Knott]] | [[User talk:Theresa knott|The otter sank]] 15:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::We're bordering on medical advice here, really. I'd advise you to visit appropriate professionals for advice. Regards, <font face="Tahoma" size="2px">'''[[User:Cyclonenim|CycloneNimrod]]'''</font><font size="1px"><sup>[[User_talk:Cyclonenim|Talk?]]</sup></font> 16:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Jack ==

Re definition of 'jack' as used in electronics:

Editors: please view the page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS_connector

Suggest that the author/s was/were confused.

A 'jack' is a socket, as in the slang 'up your jack'.
Therefore a 'plug' cannot possibly be a jack.

Cheers, bwegz <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Bwegz|Bwegz]] ([[User talk:Bwegz|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Bwegz|contribs]]) 13:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Can be either plug or socket - see [[jack (connector)]]. I would assume "jack" by default meant a plug, but that may be a [[Britishism]]. Reminds me of the time when we pretended innocent puzzlement and made our physics teacher explain the origin of the terms "male connector" and "female connector" ... "Gosh, sir, isn't that a bit rude ?". [[User:Gandalf61|Gandalf61]] ([[User talk:Gandalf61|talk]]) 14:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

::Strangely enough, I've always thought using the word "jack" to refer to to connectors, is an [[americanism]], while the british would prefer the words "plug" or "socket". [[User:Astronaut|Astronaut]] ([[User talk:Astronaut|talk]]) 15:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


:::A jack is the socket and a plug is the plug. "Jack" alone has never, to my knowledge, referred to a plug in a [[WP:RS|reliable source]] such as a standards guide, a handbook for professionals or a textbook. See [http://books.google.com/books?id=-EojbvPF_8AC&pg=PA7&dq=%22phone+plug%22+%22phone+jack%22&lr=&as_brr=0&sig=pfXc1CrIUcid5ryePt_nJ_FEIWw] from 2006 for phone plug and phone jack. A manufacturer's site [http://catalog.belkin.com/IWCatProductPage.process?Product_Id=23672] shows an adapter with two RCA jacks and one RCA plug. The terms are not interchangeable. Somehow the possible British usage is used in [[TRS connector]] with the redundant term "jack plug" to refer to what the references from the article call simply a "plug." It would be interesting to add a historical paragraph showning the development of this redundant terminology in popular British usage. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 18:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::::See [http://www.juno.co.uk/artists/4+Inch+Jack+Stereo+Audio+Extension+Cable/] & [http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hama-Audio-Adapter-Female-Stereo/dp/B00006J6JG] & [http://www.juno.co.uk/products/296707-01.htm] & [http://www.dolphinmusic.co.uk/page/shop/flypage/product_id/5455]. From what I can tell, jack means connector or more specifically TRS connector in the UK. It does not generally mean socket so jack jack makes no sense [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 05:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:There are some books [http://books.google.com/books?lr=&as_brr=0&q=++%22jack+plug%22] which use "jack plug" to refer to a plug. Perhaps this was to make it clear they were not referring to a "mains plug." Logically they should call the female part a "jack jack." Older books such as this 1917 one [http://books.google.com/books?id=N7JRAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA140&dq=%22plug+jack%22%22&lr=&as_brr=0] just call them a plug and a jack (referring to 1/4 inch telephone plugs and jacks). [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 19:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Anyone else ever encountered "Jill"? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 00:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->Boticide would be sweet--[[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 00:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:According to the OED (2nd ed. 1989), a jack is specifically a socket with one or more pairs of normally closed contacts that open when the plug is inserted, so that the plug becomes part of the circuit (earliest def. 1891). Thus (OR alert) the term 'jack plug' makes sense if you define it as the type of plug that is designed to be inserted into a jack. I also looked on answers.com, which consists mainly if not entirely of US sources, but it also says that a jack is a socket. So I agree with the OP. --[[User:Heron|Heron]] ([[User talk:Heron|talk]]) 10:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Ants ==

I have read somewhere that if ants where scaled up to human size they would collapse under their own weight. Is this true? If so, what forces change over thw dimensions which are so relatively close to each other? [[User:Bastard Soap|Bastard Soap]] ([[User talk:Bastard Soap|talk]]) 14:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:Yes. I think we have an article on this somewhere, but it's simple to explain: if you scale up an ant by a factor r, then it will become r<sup>3</sup> times heavier, and its legs will become r<sup>2</sup> times thicker (in terms of cross-sectional area, which is proportional to load-bearing ability). Thus the stress on the legs will go up by a factor of r, so for r large enough (up to human scale is plenty), they'll break. [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 14:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::The classic text here is [[On Being the Right Size]]. [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 14:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

::See also [[Square-cube law]]. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 17:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== EPISTEMOLOGICAL UNITY: ==



DOES AN EPISTEMOLOGICAL UNITY AMIDST GRAVITY AND ELECTROMAGNETISM EXIST, OR NOT? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/134.2.3.103|134.2.3.103]] ([[User talk:134.2.3.103|talk]]) 15:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Which answer would be more satisfying to you, "YES" or "NO"? You need to [[WP:RD/H|more carefully define]] [[epistemology]] and [[unity]] to really enable a meaningful answer here. [[User:Nimur|Nimur]] ([[User talk:Nimur|talk]]) 15:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

::Considering epistemology refers to philosophy, perhaps the philosophy desk would be a better place for your question? Had you wanted to know something on a scientific basis, we may have been able to help.



== Sky color with thicker atmosphere ==

If the Earth's atmosphere was thicker but of the same composition, what would the sky look like? How much thicker would the atmosphere have to be to make a difference that we could see with the naked eye? [[Special:Contributions/69.111.189.55|69.111.189.55]] ([[User talk:69.111.189.55|talk]]) 18:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:Well, I'd say a ''thinner'' atmosphere would scatter less light, so would look darker - possibly dark enough to see stars through it. Then, a thicker atmosphere would scatter more light and likely appear brighter and whiter. The [[extraterrestrial skies]] article may shed some light too. ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 18:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:It's been a long time since I did any work on simulating atmospheric effects, but I don't believe there would be any major changes. [[Rayleigh scattering]] is already strong enough that outer space doesn't contribute much to the color of the sky. The most noticeable change would be that [[atmospheric bluing]] of distant objects would get stronger, and be visible on closer objects. Eventually you'd reach a point where the Moon is no longer visible (quick estimate: a 1000-fold increase in atmospheric pressure), but I don't think you'd lose sight of the Sun before the atmosphere got so thick it wouldn't be a gas anymore. --[[User:Carnildo|Carnildo]] ([[User talk:Carnildo|talk]]) 21:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Coccinellidae diseases and breeds ==

I live in Topeka, Kansas at 39° N 95° W. We have had three dry summers in a row. Last summer I noticed none of the lady bugs had very good spots. Our local ladybugs have always been a bittersweet color, not bright red, and that has not changed. Very suddenly it became difficult to find a ladybug with spots. The ones that do have spots are "faded". It's like the spot disintegrated. The black is still a true black but the spots have become sort of granular, like the way a newspaper makes gray with black ink on white paper. In addition the ladybugs seem slow, they don't fly as often and they don't even discharge very readily. My question is, could this be a disease like the colony collapse virus in bees, or is it an invasion of a slow and spotless species?

[[Special:Contributions/99.10.73.248|99.10.73.248]] ([[User talk:99.10.73.248|talk]]) 20:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:To me, this sounds more like [[natural selection]] due to environmental pressures than diseases. According to the [[ladybug]] article, there are hundreds of species, presumably all with different combinations of colorations and spots. Because of the short breeding times, it is quite possible that environmental changes have, over successive generations, caused a different population of species to become more common than what you were observing a few years ago. Or the dominant species in your area have adapted to the new environment, and a consequence of this adaptation may include a different coloration. ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 20:26, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== worm farms ==

I'm thinking of getting a worm farm, but I'm concerned about issues like smelliness. I've looked at the article, and indeed odours are a potential hazard, so can anyone tell me from theory or experience if this is a major problem, or if it is easy to avoid? I live in a block of flats, and my gardening ventures have turned out poorly, like if I try to preserve a plant, it soon turns into compost, so I'm not sure how I'll go at maintaining compost itself. The indicators are that I have no skill whatsoever at this kind of thing, so I need it to be easy. thanks, [[Special:Contributions/203.221.127.63|203.221.127.63]] ([[User talk:203.221.127.63|talk]]) 20:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:You didn't say if you are restricted to gardening indoors. Assuming you must do it indoors, you would have similar problems with odors as a pet owner. If it were me, I'd put my worm farm in a terrarium with a tight lid, with sufficient water, sunlight, and plant matter growing to provide oxygen to the worms. The odor should then be fairly well contained. I can't imagine why you'd want a worm farm indoors, though.
:Also, if you have no skill whatsoever at gardening and related activities, perhaps you should try another hobby? Raising goldfish or something? ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 21:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::Do you wish to have a worm-farm for the sake of breeding [[Vermicompost|worms]], or as a means of producing [[compost]] or in order to compost your [[Green waste|kitchen waste]] (rather than disposing of it in the trash.) All these choices have different answers. In general if compost gets smelly, something is going wrong. You either added something that killed "the right kind" of bacteria or your compost isn't getting enough air. You might consider using a tumbler. But read the reviews. (Don't trust anyone who says something about 2-4 weeks!) Some types aren't as convenient as they look. I remember seeing DIY instructions somewhere, but couldn't find them just now. If you don't trust your abilities, start small. Good luck.[[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 22:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:What's the point? ----[[User:Seans Potato Business|Seans]] '''[[User talk:Seans Potato Business|Potato Business]]''' 22:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::If you have chickens or like going line fishing you might want to have the worms. (There are even people who maintain a small business by selling them.) If you have a garden you want the compost and if you want to pamper your "green conscience" you can recycle your biodegradable waste that way. (Warning: The average person produces more of that than is good for an ordinary sized vermicompost!)--[[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 00:18, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Sciences ==

How are the 3 branches of sciences, Chemistry, Biology and physics linked. Many physicists say that chemistry and biology are just subsets of physics. However physics seems to be the most theoretical science as it revolves around theories while Biology and chemistry seem to be less theoretical with clearer evidence. Chemistry and biology also seem less quantitative. Are chemistry and Biology just looking at the same thing as physics from a different perspective? [[User:Clover345|Clover345]] ([[User talk:Clover345|talk]]) 21:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:Well, I've heard it said "without physics, there would be no chemistry, and without chemistry, there would be no biology." Yes, they are linked. There are even entire disciplines that consist of overlaps between physics, chemistry, and biology: [[biophysics]], [[biochemistry]], [[physical chemistry]], [[chemical physics]], and [[solid state physics]], for example. Physics isn't necessarily more theoretical; we have [[applied physics]] as well as [[theoretical chemistry]] as disciplines of study. ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 21:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:Technically all sciences should be linked as describing different levels and aspects of the same reality. In practice, though, the linkages are not easy to make. Part of it is a problem of scale—there's a limit to how many different elements you can describe in a physical system before the calculations produce chaotic and unstable outcomes, much less the computational difficulties. But beyond that, it's often the case that concepts developed within one context don't easily translate into another context—they're [[incommensurability|incommensurable]], in the terminology of philosophy of science [[Thomas Kuhn]]. In any case, we wouldn't necessarily expect all current theories to mesh together perfectly, since a good number of them are probably wrong, incomplete, or just rough abstractions of how nature actually works anyway. You'd have to assume they were all correct to expect they all fit together perfectly, and at the moment nobody even thinks that holy-of-holies subject, physics, is entirely complete or correct (cf. the commonly cited problem that General Relativity and the Standard Model are incompatible).
:And then, on top of everything else, there are also the problems you mentioned: the different branches of science, the different disciplines, have evolved very differently over time, some being more quantitative, some being more qualitative, some focusing on a rather strict empiricism, some putting emphasis on mathematical theorizing, etc. Theoretically, again, if they were all describing the same reality accurately and with the same degree of precision, they'd all find ways to translate, but they aren't necessarily doing that (accurately, anyway).
:There's no historical or philosophical reason to think that many of the currently mature sub-fields of science should easily reduce to one another. Some do; some don't. In any case, reductionism has its limits. Technically quantum physics should correspond in some way to molecular biology and from there to cellular biology and organismic biology. But quantum physics doesn't really tell us anything useful about organisms. It's not a useful way to think about them and it's not going to give you an insights into them. Can everything be reduced to it? Maybe, maybe not. Would it help us understand very much if we knew how to reduce things to that? Not necessarily. At some level we can consider all of the different levels of nature to be somewhat autonomous, somewhat unconnected, because it simplifies things even more than reductionism does—even though reductionism ''appears'' to simplify things, it really complicates them, because you start having to talk in terms of emergent effects and other things that are pretty hard to express either mathematically or conceptually, and are far beyond our computational abilities.
:One last, last comment. One of the most intense areas of research in the United States over the last 50 years has been nuclear weapons. The dream has always been to be able to have total computational understanding of all of the processes that go on inside the exploding weapons, from the quantum level up through the macroscopic turbulence effects. The largest supercomputers have been developed again and again to work on specifically this purpose. If any area should demonstrate a mature understanding of how various sciences reduce to one another, this should be it. But it doesn't quite work. They've never been able to design reliable nuclear weapons from purely first principles—they've always needed testing, test data, modeling on smaller systems. If they can't do it there, I doubt they can do it anywhere, just because this has been a major area in which they've tried to do it and have strong incentive to do it. Just my two (dozen) cents. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 23:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::World-class answer, .46. --[[User:TotoBaggins|Sean]] 01:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

::I think *.46 was dancing around this issue, but let me say it anyway: even with a [[theory of everything]] and unlimited computational power, you can't derive biology from physics. People have, sometimes jokingly and sometimes seriously, proposed that the final theory of physics will be "all logically possible worlds exist". Imagine this is true for a second. Does physics reduce to it? Only if our world is the only logically possible world, which I find pretty implausible. Otherwise we still need general relativity and the standard model, not as a matter of practicality but as a matter of principle. And we still need physicists, doing the same things they do now, because "all logically possible worlds exist" doesn't tell us which extension of the Standard Model is the correct one in the world we find ourselves in. The same thing happens at every level of science. Physics can't predict [http://www.berkeleybreathed.com/pages/Favorite_Strips_Full.asp?ID=7 penguins]. -- [[User:BenRG|BenRG]] ([[User talk:BenRG|talk]]) 13:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:According to one former physics department chair I know: The 19th century was the century of chemistry, the 20th century was the century of physics, and the 21st century will be the century of biology... This is meant to the reflect that person's opinion about when the most important discoveries in each discipline occured/will occur. [[User:Dragons flight|Dragons flight]] ([[User talk:Dragons flight|talk]]) 23:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

::Of course, historically it doesn't ''quite'' work out that way. Biology started to eclipse physics as "the" hot thing as early as the mid-1950s, and by the 1970s it was clear that physics wasn't going to come up with anything as earth-shattering as it had in the past, not compared to biology. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 23:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

::: I dunno, perhaps it could [[LHC|in a few months]], though biology does need some more of a push to assert it's validity in the face of some silly doubts. [[User:Chris Mason|Chris M.]] ([[User talk:Chris Mason|talk]]) 17:16, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Amino acid substitutions in engineering; phosphorylation ==

There are certain amino acid substitutions that can be made in genetic engineering to maintain a protein's structural properties but prevent phosphorylation of residues or mimic constitutive phosphorylation. What are these substitutions? ----[[User:Seans Potato Business|Seans]] '''[[User talk:Seans Potato Business|Potato Business]]''' 22:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:Typically single amino acid mutations to [[glutamic acid|glutamic]] or [[aspartic acid]] will mimic the phosphorlyated state due to the net negative charge. Additionally a serine, threoine or tyrosine mutation to alanine is a good starting point for preventing phosphorylation at known sites. [[User:Wisdom89|'''<font color="#660000">Wisdom89</font>''']] <sub>([[User_talk:Wisdom89|<small><sub><font color="#17001E">T</font></sub></small>]] / [[Special:Contributions/Wisdom89|<small><sup><font color="#17001E">C</font></sup></small>]])</sub> 01:45, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Liquid ==

Do all liquids contain water? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.169.24.1|75.169.24.1]] ([[User talk:75.169.24.1|talk]]) 23:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:No. To be "liquid" is just a state of matter. If you heat anything up to its melting point it'll become a liquid. No water necessary. Some pure elements are even liquids at just room temperature, like [[Mercury (element)|mercury]]. Water is a specific molecule that happens to be a liquid at room temperature (and even it is not always a liquid—it doesn't need to be too hot to become a gas, or too cold to become a solid). --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 23:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

::Hi. Also, some substances, such as [[Carbon dioxide]], will go directly from a solid to a gas (or vice versa) at its evaporation/freezing point, in a process called [[sublimation]], and the visible gas released does not have to contain water, but whether it usually does or not, I'm not sure, as the cold temperatures can condense water to become visible. Thanks. ~<font color="blue">[[User:AstroHurricane001/A|A]][[User:AstroHurricane001|H]][[User:AstroHurricane001/D|1]]</font><sup>([[User:AstroHurricane001/T|T]][[Special:Contributions/AstroHurricane001|C]][[User:AstroHurricane001/U|U]])</sup> 17:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

= May 31 =

==Fermentation in eukaryotic cells==
Where does fermentation or anaerobic respiration occur in eukaryotic cells. Is it the cytoplasm, the mitochondria, or what? I've been searching online, and I can't find any clear answer. Any help would be greatly appreciated. [[User:FlamingSilmaril|FlamingSilmaril]] ([[User talk:FlamingSilmaril|talk]]) 00:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

In the cytoplasm. [[User:Wisdom89|'''<font color="#660000">Wisdom89</font>''']] <sub>([[User_talk:Wisdom89|<small><sub><font color="#17001E">T</font></sub></small>]] / [[Special:Contributions/Wisdom89|<small><sup><font color="#17001E">C</font></sup></small>]])</sub> 00:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks very much. [[User:FlamingSilmaril|FlamingSilmaril]] ([[User talk:FlamingSilmaril|talk]]) 00:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== EEG and epilepsy ==

Hi,

Does anyone knows if EEG data that are typical of epileptic seizures can be the sign of other illnesses than epilepsy?

Thanks! <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/85.0.41.187|85.0.41.187]] ([[User talk:85.0.41.187|talk]]) 02:37, 31 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:[[Electroencephalogram#Comparison_table]] may be of some use to you. If you are seeking medical advise, however, it's advisable to see your [[physician]]. Regards, <font face="Tahoma" size="2px">'''[[User:Cyclonenim|CycloneNimrod]]'''</font> <font size="1px"><sup>[[User_talk:Cyclonenim|talk?]]</sup></font><font size="1px"><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Cyclonenim|contribs?]]</sub></font> 17:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Acceleration Due to Gravity ==

Hello. How is the following equation for acceleration due to gravity proved: <math>\vartriangle \overrightarrow{d} = \overrightarrow{v}\vartriangle t + \frac{1}{2}\overrightarrow{a}(\vartriangle t)^2</math>? Thanks in advance. --[[User:Mayfare|Mayfare]] ([[User talk:Mayfare|talk]]) 02:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:In science there is no such thing as a proof, see [[Scientific method]] and [[Epistemology]] as well as the [[Science]] article. For example, for centuries [[Newton's law of gravitation]] was the widely accepted theory, but know we know that [[General relativity]] explains many things that Newton's theory did not. '''[[User:Jkasd|<font color="#445599">J</font>]][[User_talk:Jkasd|<font color="#44AA66">kasd</font>]]''' 05:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

::Although Jkasd is right, this doesn't mean there's anything wrong with your equation just because it's newtonian. On that note, newton did derive it from somewhere, he didn't just pull it out of hat. It's just straight up [[calculus]]. One of the major ideas underlying newtonian physics is that when a force is applied to an object, it ACCELERATES in the direction of that force. <math> \vartriangle\overrightarrow{a} = \overrightarrow{a} </math> for a constant force (such as gravity). Accerleration is given in units of m/s^2, so <math> \vartriangle \overrightarrow{v} = \overrightarrow{a} \vartriangle t + \overrightarrow{v}_i </math> . If you've done calculus, you may have noticed that as speed is the first derivative of accerlation, similarly <math> \vartriangle \overrightarrow{v} = \overrightarrow{a} \vartriangle t + \overrightarrow{v}_i </math> is the first derivative of <math> \vartriangle\overrightarrow{a} = \overrightarrow{a} </math> . The equation you gave is just the second derivative:

<math> \vartriangle\overrightarrow{a} = \overrightarrow{a} </math>
<math> \vartriangle \overrightarrow{v} = \overrightarrow{a} \vartriangle t + \overrightarrow{v}_i </math>
<math> \vartriangle \overrightarrow{d} = \frac{1}{2}\overrightarrow{a}(\vartriangle t)^2 + \overrightarrow{v}\vartriangle t + \overrightarrow{d}_i </math>

::Ta Da! That's how it's ''derived''. Your equation is just a fancy way of saying "Displacement is the second derivative of acceleration." As Jkasd pointed out, the most you can do is ''verify'' it to a high degree of certainty via experimentation. PS: this was totally the first time I played with making equations in wikipedia, and I found it to be a huge pain in the ass. For the record. --[[User:Shaggorama|Shaggorama]] ([[User talk:Shaggorama|talk]]) 08:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:Actually, I think you meant to say that the acceleration is the second derivative of the displacement function. What you did above was not differentiation, but integration. If you take the original definition of acceleration as the change in velocity over the change in time (valid only if acceleration is constant), and rearrange the equation you get the velocity equation above. If you integrate that with respect to time, you get the equation you originally asked about. [[User:PhySusie|PhySusie]] ([[User talk:PhySusie|talk]]) 11:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:Except (on closer examination) that the second equation in the box should have final velocity on the left side of the equation (not change in velocity) and the third equation should have final position on the left side (not change in position). [[User:PhySusie|PhySusie]] ([[User talk:PhySusie|talk]]) 11:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Why is there <math>\frac{1}{2}</math>? --[[User:Mayfare|Mayfare]] ([[User talk:Mayfare|talk]]) 13:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:This is the standard result for integrating a polynomial of degree one; that is to say:
:<math>\int(t)dt = \tfrac{1}{2} t^2 + C </math>
:See [[integral]]. Very briefly, 1/2 is the result of calculating this integral from the definition of integration. Evidently you haven't had your first [[calculus]] class yet! All in good time; you will learn these tools if you continue your study of physics. For now, suffice to say that calculus is the mathematical tool developed by [[Isaac Newton]] while he was working on [[mechanics]] (physics). Calculus is essential to the study of physics, because it allows consideration of continuous quantities (smooth motion, for example). Integration and differentiation are not very difficult to learn if you already understand algebra; the twist is conceptual - applying limits, continuity, and functional analysis; and then practicing on a lot of sample problems. [[User:Nimur|Nimur]] ([[User talk:Nimur|talk]]) 15:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Ice in a Hot Room? ==

How effective, if at all, would a jar of ice be at cooling down a hot room? [[User:Digger3000|Digger3000]] ([[User talk:Digger3000|talk]]) 03:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:[[Evaporative cooler]] has a section on performance.--[[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 04:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

::Evaporative coolers start with liquid water. Ice can absorb more heat. Just a moment, let me do some arithmetic... --Anonymous, 05:00 UTC, May 31, 2008.

::Okay, say you start with 1 kg of ice at -15 C from a freezer, and you want to finish with water vapor at a room temperature of 25&deg;C. The [[specific heat]] of ice is 2.05 J/gnbsp;K (or equivalently kJ/kgnbsp;&deg;C), so you'll need 15x2.05 kJ to reach the freezing point. Then the [[latent heat of fusion]] of water is 333.55 kJ/kg, so you'll need that many more kilojoules to get a liquid. Now liquid water has a higher specific heat, 4.18 kJ/kgnbsp;&deg;C, so it's 25x4.18 kJ to reach room temperature. And finally the [[latent heat of vaporization]] is a further 2,270 kJ/kg. So the total heat energy needed adds up to over 2,700 kJ.

::Now say that the room is 5 m square by 3 m high; that's 75 m&sup3;. The [[density of air]] is about 1.2 kg/m&sup3;, so that's 90 kg of air. It could give up 2,700/90 = 30 kJ/kg. The specific heat of air is 1 kJ/kg&nbsp;&deg;C, so a 1 kg chunk of ice could lower the temperature of the air by a full 30&deg;C.

::''But there's a big flaw in the above calculation'', which is that I assumed that the ''same'' 90 kg of air would be present the whole time! In practice, air in a normal room is circulating in and out all the time, even when the doors and windows are closed. That's why you don't suffocate when inside a building. The melting and evaporation of ice is a slow process and there's not much you can do to speed it up.

::In other words, it's not the heat capacity of the ice that's the issue, it's the transfer rate of heat from the air to the ice. You not only need to cool the air, you need to cool it before it's replaced with fresh warm air from outside. It is possible to cool air with ice -- it used to be done routinely on trains, before [[head-end power]] was available to run air-conditioners - but in practice it takes a lot of ice, way more than my calculation above would suggest. Forcing the air to blow over the surface of the ice would only help a little, because it doesn't have much surface area.

::--Anonymous, 05:36 UTC, May 31, 2008.

:::On trains in India during the 19th century, this type of air-conditioner worked by misting ice water into the train car. The device was called a [[thermantidote]]. I had a heck of a time looking this word up when I read [http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext04/kkhyb10.txt this novel] (a broken thermantidote ended up being some kind of ... hiding place for a criminal, or something like that). This terminology is decisively not in current use in America (we've still got a redlink article)! I figured it sounded like some kind of medication. [[User:Nimur|Nimur]] ([[User talk:Nimur|talk]]) 15:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Human Biology ==

The subject is Sweat Glands. The question is: The body has many sweat glands, but what parts of the body or where on the body sweat glands '''''CANNOT''''' be found??
[[Special:Contributions/75.89.250.154|75.89.250.154]] ([[User talk:75.89.250.154|talk]]) 04:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:Next question, "When's your homework due?" Here's a hot tip on how to find answers for such questions. Your teacher has probably assigned a textbook for this class. I's a great idea to actually '''get''' that. (Check for used books if your budget's strapped or check your local library.) Then go to the table of contents in the back. Look for "sweat" or related subjects. That should either get you a page, or at least the section. [[Skimming (reading)|skim]] that section for things that say "sweat" or "glands", and start reading around it. Pay attention to things saying "except", "no" or "not". That should get you the answer and the skills you're building that way can let you survive not just to the next test, but throughout all your studies.[[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 04:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:[[WP:SARCASM]]. Careful with the tone. This doesn't appear to be a homework question. Regardless, to the user who asked the question, simply scour the internet. Seriously, there's loads of info out there about this topic. [[User:Wisdom89|'''<font color="#660000">Wisdom89</font>''']] <sub>([[User_talk:Wisdom89|<small><sub><font color="#17001E">T</font></sub></small>]] / [[Special:Contributions/Wisdom89|<small><sup><font color="#17001E">C</font></sup></small>]])</sub> 05:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
::To me it does sounds either like a homework or quiz question [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 05:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:You need to qualify the answer you're looking for, or the question is trivial: I don't think you can find sweat glands in any of the internal organs. If you're restricting the answer to places on the surface of the body, you need to decide whether, say, finger nails count as an acceptable answer. --[[Special:Contributions/72.78.237.206|72.78.237.206]] ([[User talk:72.78.237.206|talk]]) 12:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Night Luminous Pearl (Ye Ming Zhu in Chinese PinYin) ==

How is the Night Luminous Pearl (frequently given as gifts to Emperors in Ancient China) formed in nature and how are they harvested ? What is the difference between this Luminous Pearl and normal Pearl from Oysters e.g its mineral contents ? Is it found only in China, as no other countries seem to refer to it in history. Currently, where can one view / purchase a real Night Luminous Pearl ?

[[Special:Contributions/218.186.72.68|218.186.72.68]] ([[User talk:218.186.72.68|talk]]) 05:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC) KKC

== logic programming ==

(1)why is logic programming regarded as the corner stone of knowledge based programming[[Special:Contributions/41.209.23.34|41.209.23.34]] ([[User talk:41.209.23.34|talk]]) 06:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
(2)can an informal model theoretic argument be established for statements like this,(has niece(x)if(3x)daughter(x,y)sibling(x,y))
{x/brother(y)}.

:>::cough::HOMEWORK::cough::< --[[User:Shaggorama|Shaggorama]] ([[User talk:Shaggorama|talk]]) 07:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Got Lost In One Of The Questions (I'll Post This On Entertainment, As I'm Not Sure Which Desk Is Most Appropriate) ==

3 media of amplitude can be expressed in keyboards, per [[Keyboard_expression]]. I am assuming different instruments, such as Brass instruments, or instruments that use water, have different ways of changing dynamics, or the amplitude of the sound that can be normally produced by them, or not, say banging a saxphone against a wall. Are there any others, and if so, could you list them all? Also, please list all theoretical, possible and/or probable ways of changing dynamics (or, in other words, the amplitude of a sound).

So what I'm saying is that for different Keyboard instruments, as per the article [[Keyboard_expression]], there are 3 ways to express dynamics.[[Special:Contributions/68.148.164.166|68.148.164.166]] ([[User talk:68.148.164.166|talk]]) 07:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Humidity and electronic equipment ==

Why do specifications for electronic equipment (TV, computer, etc.) specify a range for humidity, eg. 10-70%? If the air is too humid or not humid enough, how does that affect the equipment? I've heard from friends that it would catch on fire, but I doubt it. [[User:Rilak|Rilak]] ([[User talk:Rilak|talk]]) 07:42, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:I'm not entirely sure, but if it's too humid, I'd say condensation might occur in the device which might short circuit the whole thing. A lack of humidity doesn't sound like it would do much, although dry air does increase the chance of static electricity building up and whatnot.[[Special:Contributions/84.198.96.249|84.198.96.249]] ([[User talk:84.198.96.249|talk]]) 08:37, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Birds and hot chips ==

<small>moved from misc desk</small> <br>
When I eat a very hot chip (or fries, depending on your preference) I can burn my mouth. But when I drop a hot chip on the floor a seagull will swallow it down whole. Do they not feel the heat of the chip in their mouth?[[User:Iiidonkeyiii|Iiidonkeyiii]] ([[User talk:Iiidonkeyiii|talk]]) 08:48, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:Good to see another seagull question here at last. First, I would think that for a bird to swallow it whole, it would be a relatively small chip so it is already cooler than the fat ones. Secondly, birds don't chew their food and gulls usually swallow their food whole, so they probably don't notice its temperature until it's too late.--[[User:Shantavira|Shantavira]]|[[User talk:Shantavira|<sup>feed me</sup>]] 09:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

::Given that they do not chew, can we conclude that they have additional [[mucous]] or other sturdy membrane linings in their [[esophagus]]? I imagine they would need to be made of tougher stuff if they regularly swallow food whole. [[User:Nimur|Nimur]] ([[User talk:Nimur|talk]]) 15:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:::Gulls also seem to be capable of quickly horking up anything that doesn't feel right in their [[Crop (anatomy)|crop]]s. Sometimes they'll make several attempts at eating that large/hard/spiky thing to see if they can get it to sit comfortably inside. The other week, I saw a gull making three attempts at keeping a whole tomato down before finally deciding just to bite into it. --[[User:Kurt Shaped Box|Kurt Shaped Box]] ([[User talk:Kurt Shaped Box|talk]]) 22:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Power Quality Managment ==

Is it possible to improve power by improving power factor?
If yes upto what percent we can improve <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Syedshahid|Syedshahid]] ([[User talk:Syedshahid|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Syedshahid|contribs]]) 08:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:See [[power factor]] and [[power factor correction]]. Both of your questions are answered there. --[[User:Heron|Heron]] ([[User talk:Heron|talk]]) 10:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Can you shoot yourself in the head twice? ==

Assume the following: a person has two pistols, one in each hand. Would it be possible for that person to fire both guns at their own head? Or would one lose muscle control faster than you can squeeze the second trigger? Pardon my morbid curiousity :) [[Special:Contributions/84.198.96.249|84.198.96.249]] ([[User talk:84.198.96.249|talk]]) 08:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:[[Rigor mortis]]—contraction of skeletal muscles due to depletion of [[adenosine triphosphate| ATP]] or [[cadaveric spasm]] might trigger the contraction of fingers of the other hand making them press the trigger. So, this might result in the situation you are speculating. I personally, have no problems with your curiosity. Regards. <span style="font: small-caps 15px times;">'''[[User:KC Panchal|<font color="#8A2BE2">—Ketan</font><font color="#000000">Panchal</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:KC Panchal|<font color="#2F4F4F">''<small>t</small>aL<big>K</big>''</font>]]'''</sup></span> 09:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
::You would be lucky to still be aiming right by the time rigor mortis sets in. It would be easier to fire both guns at the same time - that ought to work fine (even if you're off by a fraction of a second there is enough delay in the firing of the gun and the loss of muscle control to get away with it - or at least, I expect there would be, I've never actually tried it!). --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 12:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:::If you're very, very lucky, you could get the 'classic' sort of suicide story where both your bullets hit each other and so don't kill you (since it's likely both your bullets will be at an angle, I presume they will still go forward and may still hurt you but I guess could potentially lose enough momentum so that they don't kill you although I can't be bothered doing the maths) [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 16:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
::::I was imagining one gun on each side of your head, so if the bullets hit each other they would do so in the middle of your brain. Where are you imagining the guns? --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 16:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:A simple [[fail-deadly]] system would be to put a strong [[rubber band]] around each trigger finger that requires you to actively ''resist'' pulling the trigger. Point the guns at your head such that one bullet's exit won't knock the other gun out of position, and then just ... relax. --[[User:TotoBaggins|Sean]] 17:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
::I'm disturbed at how practical these answers are getting. Doesn't this fall under the aegis of no medical advice? ;-)--[[User:Fangz|Fangz]] ([[User talk:Fangz|talk]]) 18:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:::It's ''no medical advice'', not ''no immoral advice''. Discussion of war and other violent means is allowed here. [[User:Spinningspark|<font style="background:#FFF090;color:#00C000">'''Sp<font style="background:#FFF0A0;color:#80C000">in<font style="color:#C08000">ni</font></font><font style="color:#C00000">ng</font></font><font style="color:#2820F0">Spark'''</font>]] 19:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:Is it true that rigour mortis doesn't set in if you're shot in the eye? [[User:Bastard Soap|Bastard Soap]] ([[User talk:Bastard Soap|talk]]) 20:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:While being shot in the head is usually fatal, a surprisingly large number of people survive. Here are some examples [http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-02-17-niustudent_N.htm][http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24900026/][http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/story.html?id=fc905513-f046-485e-b4df-16db89eaa26d][http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Music/08/09/cohn.shot/index.html]. However, my favourite is Michael Moylin who woke up with such a severe headache he thought he had suffered an anuerism. The hospital soon put him straight though, and pointed out that his wife had shot him in the head while he had been sleeping [http://www.buzzle.com/articles/man-with-terrible-headache-shot-by-wife-in-his-sleep.html][http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6246800.stm]. So yes, it would be quite possible to shoot yourself in the head multiple times because you might survive the first bullet. This is not a reliable method however - don't try this at home. [[User:Spinningspark|<font style="background:#FFF090;color:#00C000">'''Sp<font style="background:#FFF0A0;color:#80C000">in<font style="color:#C08000">ni</font></font><font style="color:#C00000">ng</font></font><font style="color:#2820F0">Spark'''</font>]] 20:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:I was trying to find a newspaper story on a woman who shot herself in the head in (possibly) the 1980s and survived. She had shot herself in the right temple but the surgeon removed the bullet from her left temple. The bullet had not, as one might imagine, passed through the brain. It had, in fact, skidded across the top of her skull underneath the skin. There was a great x-ray pic in the papers at the time - if anyone has a link please post it, I couldn't find it. Some women are just lousy shots I guess[http://www.metacafe.com/watch/687348/why_women_shouldnt_be_cops/]. [[User:Spinningspark|<font style="background:#FFF090;color:#00C000">'''Sp<font style="background:#FFF0A0;color:#80C000">in<font style="color:#C08000">ni</font></font><font style="color:#C00000">ng</font></font><font style="color:#2820F0">Spark'''</font>]] 20:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

::Well, Bastard Soap (am not calling you names! That's your user name), considering the mechanism by which rigor mortis develops (depletion of ATP) in the individual skeletal muscles, I don't think what happens to the brain (shooting in the eye) should have much influence upon the setting in of rigor mortis. Though there are factors like temperature, emotional state, poisoning by arsenic, etc. that could alter the rapidity and depth of rigor mortis, I don't know if the factor you are talking of could also be one of these. But, remember all these factors I enumerated simply determine the intensity and timing of rigor mortis not whether it develops or not, per se.
::With all this talk going about medical advice and some one stating ''"Discussion of war and other violent means is allowed here."'', this point from [[WP:Common sense]] could be instructive here: <blockquote>''"Similarly, just because something [[wikipedia:Blocking policy#Disruption|disruptive]] is not forbidden in a written rule doesn't mean it's a good idea (e.g., [[wikipedia:Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point|don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point]]). The ''spirit'' of the rules is more important than the letter."''</blockquote> But since, I believe the user who originally started the topic must be well aware that it can be fairly assumed that firing of both the pistols doesn't really greatly alter the probability of death, he'she is not asking for medical advice. Regards. <span style="font: small-caps 15px times;">'''[[User:KC Panchal|<font color="#8A2BE2">—Ketan</font><font color="#000000">Panchal</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:KC Panchal|<font color="#2F4F4F">''<small>t</small>aL<big>K</big>''</font>]]'''</sup></span> 20:52, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Yes, I'm indeed quite aware that one shot to the head is usually quite fatal enough without the need for a second one ;). I just get the occasional bout of morbid curiousity. I think the rubber band guy might just be on to something though, very clever :D[[Special:Contributions/84.198.96.249|84.198.96.249]] ([[User talk:84.198.96.249|talk]]) 22:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:Going back to the original scenario, let's say that the guns involved are Walther P99 pistols loaded with american .40 calibre ammunition with a muzzle velocity of 320m/s. Let's further assume that the bullet is decelerated to a complete stop just before exiting the head (this assumption gives you the maximum possible reaction time, a "through and through" shot will give you less time as the bullet travels faster). With those assumptions, the travel time through my 16cm head would be exactly 1ms. So you have, at most, a 1ms reaction time to fire the second gun before your brains are scrambled and unable to respond. According to the article [[reaction time]] for an audio stimulus is about 150ms. So the answer is no unless you contrive to fire both guns simultaneoulsy. Simultaneous in this context being <math>\pm 500 \mu s</math>. This is humanly next to impossible, but probably unverified by experiment. Don't try this at home. [[User:Spinningspark|<font style="background:#FFF090;color:#00C000">'''Sp<font style="background:#FFF0A0;color:#80C000">in<font style="color:#C08000">ni</font></font><font style="color:#C00000">ng</font></font><font style="color:#2820F0">Spark'''</font>]] 22:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Trapezius muscle—A doubt! ==


If all the fibers in the trapezius muscle are supplied by the same nerve, will the simultaneous contraction of the superior and inferior fibers not antagonize each others' actions? Hope someone answers it.

PS: I have posted the same question on the talk page of the article [[trapezius muscle]].


Regards.

<span style="font: small-caps 15px times;">'''[[User:KC Panchal|<font color="#8A2BE2">—Ketan</font><font color="#000000">Panchal</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:KC Panchal|<font color="#2F4F4F">''<small>t</small>aL<big>K</big>''</font>]]'''</sup></span> 09:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:Not all [[neuron]]s that form the part of the [[accessory nerve]] that supplies the trapezius need fire at the same time. Indeed, upper and lower fibres of trapezius have opposite actions on the scapula. -- [[User:Flyguy649|Flyguy649]] [[User talk:Flyguy649|<sup>talk]]</sup> 14:29, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

::Hi flyguy! You mean these neurons come from different spinal segments? Yes, that is a distinct possibility considering that the spinal accessory nucleus has the root values of C1-C5. Thanks. Regards. <span style="font: small-caps 15px times;">'''[[User:KC Panchal|<font color="#8A2BE2">—Ketan</font><font color="#000000">Panchal</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:KC Panchal|<font color="#2F4F4F">''<small>t</small>aL<big>K</big>''</font>]]'''</sup></span> 17:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Pauli Equation ==

I I wanted to use the [[Pauli equation]] to describe a [[Spin (physics)|spin-4]] particle, would I just have to replace the [[Pauli matrices]] with the spin-4 equivalents, or would I have to change something else, such as changing the part at the beginning fron 1/2m to 4m? Thanks, [[User:*Max*|*Max*]] ([[User talk:*Max*|talk]]) 16:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC).

== NUCLEOPHILICITY VS BASICITY ==

Hello,can some1 please help me to undstand what is the difference between NUCLEOPHILICITY and BASICITY.After going through books,i have learnt that they are somehow directly proportional in terms of strenght.But I'm bit confused as I find sometimes stronger nucleophiles are weaker bases.also i found that type of solvent affects nucleophilic nature.My text books dont explain clearly why.Can Some1 please help? [[User:Abhiroopron|Abhiroopron]] ([[User talk:Abhiroopron|talk]]) 17:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC) Abhiroop.

== Properties of silk dope ==

Hi - our articles are a bit vague on the actual properties of the protein solution that passes through spinnerets to produce silk. Is it called 'silk dope' or is there a more technical general term? What does it look like en masse? What is its colour, viscosity etc?

Thanks [[User:Adambrowne666|Adambrowne666]] ([[User talk:Adambrowne666|talk]]) 17:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:Which articles? The [[spider silk]] article has some good information. The properties of the silk ingredients are rather complex (the protein sequences are different depending on the species, and only a few have been decoded), and describes various attempts to synthesize it, with references for further reading. ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 19:45, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Asthma + Other disease ==

When I was three, I had an athsma attack with another disease at the same time. I do not remember the name of the disease, but I could not breath in or out. The last I remember of that day was falling asleep after a mask was put on me, leaving me to believe I had surgery. Ever since then, I have only had acute bronchitis, not general asthma. Does anyone in the medical field know what treatment could possibly lead to this(As well as what the disease could be)? I have a highly curious mind, so semi-complex awnsers are okay, just try not to get all E=MC<sup>2</sup> over me. [[Special:Contributions/67.171.165.4|67.171.165.4]] ([[User talk:67.171.165.4|talk]]) 20:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:Do you mean [[chronic]] bronchitis? --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 21:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Help with my daughter ==

My daughter is going through puberty and is starting to develop acne. I'm trying to find research papers and information regarding the effect of physical exercise on acne. Thank you.--[[User:Goon Noot|Goon Noot]] ([[User talk:Goon Noot|talk]]) 20:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:Our article [[acne]] mentions many things that may cause or help counter acne, but physical exercise isn't one of them. I suspect therefore that exercise has little impact on it. -- [[User:SGBailey|SGBailey]] ([[User talk:SGBailey|talk]]) 21:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
:We can't give medical advice here, so there's not a lot of help we can offer. You would be best off consulting your GP. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 21:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I did not ask for medical advice. I specifically asked for research papers and information. Not advice.--[[User:Goon Noot|Goon Noot]] ([[User talk:Goon Noot|talk]]) 22:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:Try this search string [http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=acne+exercise&hl=en&lr=] which seems to get a lot of relevant hits. however, most of them require a subscription to view the full article. [[User:Spinningspark|<font style="background:#FFF090;color:#00C000">'''Sp<font style="background:#FFF0A0;color:#80C000">in<font style="color:#C08000">ni</font></font><font style="color:#C00000">ng</font></font><font style="color:#2820F0">Spark'''</font>]] 22:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Muscle Growth ==

I know this isn't probably the best place to ask for exercise advice, but I had some questions about the notion of between-lifting rest. I know you're not supposed to lift weights every day, because you need to give your muscles time to rest and regrow. But I've also heard that there are some muscles that it's OK to work every day (like, it's OK to run daily, I think), and I've also heard that abs work like this. I've also heard something, which doesn't make much sense to me, about how body-weight exercises (push ups, pull ups, etc) can be done daily, for some reason possibly having to do with lightness of weight. Do any of you know, from personal or scientific knowledge, how much of this is accurate, or what the real story is?

And, regardless of what particular muscles and exercise types call for what types of rest, what are the deleterious effects of not getting enough rest time? Will my muscles grow less if I do pushups daily than if I did them every other day? Will the muscle be more dense? Bigger? More wirey? I don't know.

And which is it that causes denser muscles, heavy weightlifting or many reps of lighter (bodyweight etc) weights? Or is the different-muscle-type-by-different-exercise stuff I've heard about pretty much made up?

Thanks,

[[Special:Contributions/70.108.222.173|70.108.222.173]] ([[User talk:70.108.222.173|talk]]) 21:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:Running every day is mostly to build endurance and reduce fat. It may actually reduce muscle growth though if done excessively. I don't know about muscle density, but more reps means more tone, while more weight means bulkier muscles. Hope that helps. [[Special:Contributions/24.46.50.159|24.46.50.159]] ([[User talk:24.46.50.159|talk]]) 23:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Genome and DNA ==

So a Gene is part of a DNA molecule. And a Genome is a complete set of Genes in a given organism. So does a single DNA molecule contain the entire genome of an animal? [[Special:Contributions/24.46.50.159|24.46.50.159]] ([[User talk:24.46.50.159|talk]]) 23:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

:The pairs of [[chromosomes]] (which are the same in all cells of the body) contain the entire genome of an animal. [[User:Wisdom89|'''<font color="#660000">Wisdom89</font>''']] <sub>([[User_talk:Wisdom89|<small><sub><font color="#17001E">T</font></sub></small>]] / [[Special:Contributions/Wisdom89|<small><sup><font color="#17001E">C</font></sup></small>]])</sub> 23:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:12, 31 May 2008

WikiProject iconTrains: Passenger trains Start‑class
WikiProject icon
 Trains Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Associated projects or task forces:
/ 
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Passenger trains task force.

I put in a map, but it has since spaced itself out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tlantanu (talk • contribs) 22:48, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Train numbers

Turboservice was 3001/3002 Turbo last ran 4-28-1973

# freq from to former name notes 11-14-1971 name 1988-89 name
12 gone Fast Mail WAS-BOS
19 gone Crescent NYP-WAS
20 gone Crescent WAS-NYP
40 gone Broadway Limited PHL-NYP Broadway Limited PHL-NYP
41 gone Broadway Limited NYP-PHL Broadway Limited NYP-PHL
42 M-Sa PHL NYP Keystone PHL-NYP Valley Forge PHL-NYP
43 7D NYP PHL Pennsylvanian Keystone NYP-PHL Valley Forge NYP-PHL
44 Su PHL NYP Pennsylvanian Big Apple PHL-NYP
45 gone Susquehanna NYP-PHL
46 gone Pennsylvania PHL-NYP
47 gone Pennsylvania NYP-PHL
50 gone George Washington WAS-BOS Cardinal WAS-NYP
51 gone James Whitcomb Riley BOS-WAS Cardinal NYP-WAS
54 WE WAS SPG
55 WD SPG WAS Vermonter
56 WD WAS SPG Vermonter
57 WE SPG WAS
66 7D NPN BOS Twilight Shoreliner Night Owl WAS-BOS
67 7D BOS NPN Twilight Shoreliner Night Owl BOS-WAS
75 James River gone
New York-Buffalo on 11-14-1971
76 Su RVR BOS Weekend Twilight Shoreliner
78 F NPN RVR James River
79 7D NYP RVR Carolinian Carolinian
80 7D RVR NYP Carolinian Carolinian
81 gone Silver Star NYP-RVR Silver Star NYP-RVR
82 Sa RVR BOS Silver Star RVR-NYP Silver Star RVR-NYP
83 F BOS NPN Silver Meteor NYP-RVR
84 WD RVR WAS Virginian Silver Meteor RVR-NYP
85 WD NYP RVR Charter Oak Champion NYP-RVR Virginian NYP-RVR
86 WD RVR BOS Charter Oak Champion? RVR-NYP Virginian RVR-NYP
87 Su NYP RVR Silver Meteor NYP-RVR
88 Sa RVR BOS Silver Meteor RVR-NYP
89 7D NYP RVR Silver Palm Palmetto Palmetto NYP-RVR
90 7D RVR NYP Silver Palm Palmetto Palmetto RVR-NYP
91 7D NYP RVR Silver Star Silver Star Silver Star NYP-RVR
92 7D RVR NYP Silver Star Silver Star Silver Star RVR-NYP
93 M-R BOS RVR Virginian
94 WD NPN BOS Old Dominion Colonial NPN-BOS
95 WD BOS NPN Old Dominion Colonial BOS-NPN
96 Tidewater gone Tidewater NPN-NYP
97 7D NYP RVR Silver Meteor Silver Meteor Silver Meteor NYP-RVR
98 7D RVR NYP Silver Meteor Silver Meteor Silver Meteor RVR-NYP
99 WE BOS NPN Virginian
111 WD NYP WAS Metroliner
121 Sa NYP WAS Metroliner
125 WD NYP WAS Metroliner
126 Legislator
Metroliner 		gone
127 WD NYP WAS
129 WD NYP WAS
130 WD WAS NYP Free State WAS-NYP
131 WE NYP WAS Congressional NYP-WAS
132 WD WAS NYP Representative Nightcap WAS-NYP
133 President gone Free State NYP-WAS
135 WE BOS WAS Nightcap NYP-WAS Potomac NYP-WAS
136 F WAS SPG
137 WD BOS WAS Midday Congressional Embassy NYP-WAS
138 WD WAS NYP Verrazano WAS-NYP
139 Mount Vernon
140 WE WAS BOS Bay State WAS-BOS Potomac WAS-SPG
141 WD BOS WAS Florida Special
Bankers 		Connecticut Yankee SPG-NYP Bankers SPG-WAS
142 Silver Meteor
|Bay State 		gone Charter Oak WAS-SPG
143 WE BOS WAS Silver Meteor
Nutmeg State 		Charter Oak SPG-WAS Connecticut Yankee SPG-WAS
144 Champion gone Connecticut Yankee WAS-SPG
145 WE SPG WAS Champion
Bay State 		Bay State BOS-WAS
146 Sa WAS SPG Florida Special
148 WD WAS BOS Bankers Connecticut Yankee WAS-SPG
150 WE WAS BOS Big Apple Yankee Clipper NYP-BOS
151 WD PHL WAS Liberty Bell Yankee Clipper BOS-NYP
152 WE WAS NYP Afternoon Congressional
153 WE NYP WAS
154 Su WAS NYP
155 WE NYP WAS Embassy
156 WE WAS NYP
157 WE NYP WAS
158 WE WAS NYP
159 WE NYP WAS Capital Sunrise
160 WE WAS BOS East Wind NYP-BOS
161 WE BOS WAS East Wind BOS-NYP Patriot BOS-WAS
162 WE WAS BOS Narragansett NYP-BOS
163 WE BOS WAS Minute Man Narragansett BOS-NYP
164 WE WAS BOS Narragansett
165 WE BOS WAS Patriot BOS-NYP
166 Su WAS BOS Mount Vernon
167 WE BOS WAS Narragansett Mount Vernon BOS-WAS
168 WE WAS BOS Narragansett WAS-BOS
169 F BOS WAS Evening Metropolitan Senator BOS-WAS
170 WD WAS BOS Colonial
Patriot 		Bunker Hill WAS-BOS Yankee Clipper WAS-BOS
171 WD BOS WAS Colonial
Mayflower 		Southern Crescent BOS-WAS
172 WD WAS BOS Senator
Mayflower 		Southern Crescent WAS-BOS
173 WD BOS WAS Senator
Yankee Clipper 		Colonial BOS-WAS last ran 4-28-1973 Yankee Clipper BOS-WAS
174 WD WAS BOS Patriot
Yankee Clipper 		Colonial WAS-BOS last ran 4-28-1973 Minute Man WAS-BOS
175 WD BOS WAS Patriot Senator BOS-WAS Minute Man BOS-WAS
176 WD WAS BOS Merchants Limited Patriot WAS-BOS Senator WAS-BOS
177 WD BOS WAS Senator Merchants Limited BOS-WAS Merchants Limited BOS-WAS
178 WD WAS BOS Concord Senator WAS-BOS Merchants Limited WAS-BOS
179 M-R BOS PHL Evening Metropolitan Mount Vernon WAS-BOS
180 WD WAS NYP Bostonian
Wall Street 		Merchants Limited PHL-BOS First State WAS-NYP
181 WD NYP WAS New Yorker
Congressional 		Valley Forge BOS-PHL Garden State Special NYP-WAS
182 WE WAS NYP Bay State
Chesapeake 		unnamed PHL-NYP Congressional WAS-NYP
183 WD NYP WAS Manhattan
Foggy Bottom 		Independece NYP-WAS
184 WD WAS NYP Yankee Clipper
New Yorker
185 WD NYP WAS Merchants Limited
Mount Vernon 		Congressional NYP-WAS
186 WD WAS NYP Merchants Limited
Times Square 		Garden State Special WAS-NYP
187 WD NYP WAS Murray Hill
Capitol Hill 		Jeffersonian NYP-WAS
188 WD WAS NYP Embassy WAS-NYP
189 Georgetown gone
190 WD WAS BOS Congressional
191 Su PHL WAS Embassy
192 WE WAS NYP
193 WD NYP WAS Potomac
194 WE NPN BOS Gotham Limited
195 WE BOS RVR Tidewater
196 M-R WAS NYP Merchants Limited
Capitol Hill
197 WE BOS PHL Benjamin Franklin BOS-PHL
198 7D WAS NYP Bowery Benjamin Franklin PHL-BOS
199 Sa NYP WAS Capitol Hill
406 Su NHV SPG shuttle from 76
412 Fast Mail gone
414 WE NHV SPG shuttle from 194
418 WD NHV SPG shuttle from 148
441 WD SPG NHV shuttle to 141
443 WE SPG NHV shuttle to 143
450 WE NHV SPG shuttle from 150
460 WE NHV SPG shuttle from 160
461 WE SPG NHV shuttle to 161
463 WE SPG NHV shuttle to 163
464 WE NHV SPG shuttle from 164
465 WE SPG NHV shuttle to 165
466 Su NHV SPG shuttle from 166
467 WE SPG NHV shuttle to 167
468 WE NHV SPG shuttle from 168
470 WD NHV SPG shuttle from 170
471 WD SPG NHV Mayflower shuttle to 171
472 WD NHV SPG Mayflower shuttle from 172
473 WD SPG NHV shuttle to 173
475 WD SPG NHV Patriot shuttle to 175
476 WD NHV SPG Merchants Limited shuttle from 176
477 WD SPG NHV Senator shuttle to 177
486 WD NHV SPG shuttle from 86
488 Sa NHV SPG shuttle from 88
490 WD NHV SPG shuttle from 190
491 WE SPG NHV shuttle to 195
493 WD SPG NHV shuttle to 93/83
494 WD NHV SPG shuttle from 94
495 WD SPG NHV shuttle to 95
497 Su SPG NHV shuttle to 197
624 WD PHL NYP
629 WD NYP PHL
630 WD PHL NYP
633 WD NYP PHL
637 Su NYP PHL Benjamin Franklin
638 Benjamin Franklin gone
639 Su-F NYP PHL Liberty Bell
640 WD PHL NYP
641 WD NYP PHL
642 WD PHL NYP
643 WE NYP PHL
644 WE PHL NYP
645 WD NYP PHL
646 WD PHL NYP
647 WD NYP PHL
648 WD PHL NYP
649 WD NYP PHL
650 Su PHL NYP
651 WE NYP PHL
652 WD PHL NYP
654 WE PHL NYP
655 WD NYP PHL
656 WD PHL NYP
657 Su NYP PHL
658 WD PHL NYP
659 Su NYP PHL
660 WE PHL NYP
661 Su NYP PHL continues to Harrisburg
662 WE PHL NYP
663 Sa NYP PHL
665 WD NYP PHL

Metroliners

# freq from to former name notes
2103 WD NYP WAS

Oppose splitting off of Virginia service, NHV-SPG service

This article is on Amtrak's Regional. It should cover the entire service, all endpoints to all endpoints. --CComMack 02:40, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Name Change

Are we absolutely sure about the name change or could it just be a clarification in the timetable? While it is in the timetable, the Amtrak website doesn't make any mention of the new name and there has not been a press release. --69.123.112.18 (talk) 21:31, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • There are no other trains anywhere in the Amtrak system. There's nothing to clarify. A lot of things will probably still refer to the train as simply a Regional, but it seems the official name is now Northeast Regional. I don't think any press release has to be made about such a small name change either. Murjax (talk) 21:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science&oldid=216282578"