Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2006 November 3

= November 3 =

More bass
Just something I've always wondered. If a person can play the bass guitar, does that mean that they could also play the double bass without much extra effort? --Kurt Shaped Box 01:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * No, other than both being string instruments I don't think they have much in common. A cello , viola or even violin would be closer to the double bass. StuRat 02:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * You'd have an advantage over a complete novice at some things: having the basic musicality you've acquired while learning to play the bass guitar, knowing intervals, how far along the string you have to move to change an interval, and so forth.  But in other ways you'd have a lot to learn:  how to use the bow, and how to be perfectly in tune without frets to guide you are a couple of things.  Producing a beautiful sound is a rather different challenge on a non-electric instrument.  So it's mixed.  :)  Antandrus  (talk) 02:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Aha. Now its funny you should ask that one! I played bass guitar for about 25 yrs then decided I would like to try something different. So I took up the EUB. In fact thats mine in the article. Whilst mine is not exactly the same as the Double bass I did find it relatively easy to adapt to because mine has a 36" scale length compared with the 34" of a bass guitar and the 42 " scale length of a DB.
 * I find that I can play the EUB with essentially the same fingering as the bass guitar. I cant use a bow on my EUB altho' you can on some versions. You are correct that you have to learn to use your ears more and always be on the look out for bad intonation, but the improved tone is more than worth the extra hassle. Actually after a while its not a hassle but a satisfation in getting the note perfectly in tune and saying to your self 'I made that note-- all by myself, no frets!'--Light current 03:09, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Of course it makes a big difference if you bow it or pluck it. DirkvdM 07:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I took one of my old electric basses and levered the frets out recently with the back of a claw hammer, and filled in the resulting gaps with filler. Not recommened on an expensive bass, but it has worked ok and seems to be an instrument some way inbetweem an electric and double bass...it sounds a lot like a double bass now, especially around the higher registers. --Amists 11:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The standard tuning on a double bass is the same as the standard tuning on a bass guitar. My son played electric bass for about a year and a half before I bought him a double bass, and he was able to play it right away.  Of course, he has an excellent ear, which is necessary for correct intonation. --Shuttlebug 22:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * That is truly amazing considering the 20% increase in scale length. How did he learn the new positions and the different fingering in zero time?--Light current 00:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I play both the electric and upright bass; the tuning is the same, but it takes some time to get used to bowing and the distance between notes. Because I also play violin, I simply jumped on a string bass and started playing. It's not that hard even with no bowed instrument experience; you'll figure it out in 30 minutes to 1 hour tops. It also helps to be able to read Bass Clef Good luck. Sturgeonman 00:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * When you jumped on it, did it break?--Light current 01:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

M*A*S*H
On the television series (maybe the movie too, I haven't seen it in a while) M*A*S*H, the door to The Swamp has a symbol on it. It looks like a trident that is pointed down and it is roughly 2 1/2 - 3' in height. There is no handle, just the tines. The outer tines are somewhat curved and would make a rough oval shape if they were to connect and they also have a number of triangular "teeth" on the outer edges of the tines. The middle tine has something that resembles a split on the end of it so it's a bit forked. I can't find a picture of it on the net right now. Does anyone know what this symbol meant or why it would be on the door to the tent? Dismas|(talk) 01:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This page says it is a North African symbol meant to ward off the evil eye. Someone talks about a variation of the symbol here, and gives a little more background. --Cam 02:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * There's a picture of a Maugham symbol on this page. --Cam 02:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Cool! Thanks!  Dismas|(talk) 02:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Square county/state
Are there any perfectly or NEAR perfectly square counties in America? Thanks! 81.93.102.50 18:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Iowa seems to have a lot. See Image:Iowa counties with names.jpg.  howch e  ng   {chat} 18:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Holy spanking! Thanks, that's.... immense. 81.93.102.50 19:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Google search for "perfectly square county" produces claims that the following are perfectly square: Walworth County, Wisconsin, Trumbull County, Ohio, Newton County, Mississippi. Also there are a lot of square looking counties in and around the Texas Panhandle. Dave6 19:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

There isn't really such a thing as a "perfect square" (or a "perfect rectangle" for that matter) on the surface of a sphere. The original surveying of land in much of North America was based on boundaries running north-south and east-west. An area with boundaries aligned that way has equal-length sides on the east and west, but (since we are in the Northern Hemisphere) the north side is slightly shorter than the south side. If you wanted the opposite sides to be equal, you could have that, but then they could not run straight north-south and east-west; in practice this was not done, because the north-south and east-west boundaries allow things to fit together nicely.

For example, I find on the web that Colorado's boundaries follow along 102&deg; and 109&deg; west longitude, and 37&deg; and 41&deg; north Latitude. Taking the Earth (for simplicity) to be a sphere of circumference 40,000 km, the south side of the state is then 40000&times;(7/360)&times;cos 37&deg; = 621 km = 386 miles long, while the north side (changing 37 to 41 in the formula) is only 587 km or 365 miles.

Of course, the difference will be less for a smaller area, like a county. Presumably these counties each have sides that are straight north-south and east-west, and are very close to equal length. Which meets the original poster's requirements.

--Anonymous, 04:48 UTC, November 4.

A riddle I forgot
I remember that there is this famous riddle that I think Wikipedia has a page on, but I forgot the riddle. I think it's unsolvable or something unless u attack the syntax of the question. Anyone know what the riddle is? Jamesino 02:16, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Gry? Hyenaste (tell) 02:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't think it's that one. Jamesino 02:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Its the one that relies on formal logic to solve it.--Light current 02:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * HAve you checked Category:Riddles to see if its there? CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 05:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The one with the $30 and the missing $1? BenC7 03:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Could be the motel one above. There you deliberately mis-state the premise when posing the question and hope the listener buys into your erroneous arithmatic. They usually do. --Justanother 00:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

End of Wikipedia
What will bring about the end of Wikipedia? (apart from spontaneous combustion of all the servers) --Light current 02:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

What are the possible scenarios that could bring about the end of Wikipedia? (apart from spontaneous combustion of all the servers) --Light current 19:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The end of the internet, of course. :-) Marco polo 02:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * When I gather enough seagulls together in one place and collapse their mass to create a black hole. --Kurt Shaped Box 02:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Look we've already discussed that topic (a few weeks ago). Minus 20 points!--Light current 02:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * You mean it hasn't already ended? --Justanother 02:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes. Alphabetagamma 03:48, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

 Humor and side discussions are fine, but this question also deserves a serious answer, does anybody have one ?

--Light current 04:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The Wikipedia reference desk works like a library reference desk not a crystal ball. Its purpose is to respond to questions requiring facts. --hydnjo talk 04:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC) addendum: My response is no longer valid as Lc has significantly altered the original question. BTW, if the context of a question is to be altered then it should be stricken and posed again with the new time/date so as to add context to responses to the original question. --hydnjo talk 19:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC) addendum 2: Well done and thank you Lc.  --hydnjo talk 19:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * It will end when people post funnybut templates CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 05:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yep, funnybut templates it is. Couldn't that image be made with vector graphics, by the way? —Bromskloss 11:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * That looks like a very tricky graident, it fades in 2 directions. but probably, if the font is available as a vector font --⁪froth T C  20:03, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * A spontaneous combustion of all the servers wouldn't end Wikipedia either becausse there are loads of copies on other servers and on cd or dvd and even if those would be lost somehow, people would just start all over again. So Marco Polo is right, only the end of the Internet would end Wikipedia. That is, it would stop being developed, but people would find different ways to spread the copies around. DirkvdM 07:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Unless, of course, Wikipedia ends because there is a nuclear holocaust or some other natural disaster.


 * A more pertinent question - would there ever be a lack of hosting funds? Sandman30s 09:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I am convinved I saw a page a year or so ago that listed several possible ways for Wikipedia to end. Sadly, I've never managed to find it again. Does anyone here remember this, or know where the page is? Carcharoth 12:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This sort of has a list, but it's not that long. – AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 12:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I could picture Wikipedia becoming obsolete once we all have brain implants that allow us to know the answer to any question by thinking of the question, and having a computer search a repository of all human knowledge (all books ever written, etc.) for the answer. This technology might take a year or two to develop, however. :-) StuRat 19:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes but the implant would need an efficient 'bullshit filter' 8-)--Light current 21:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * When fanboy cruft comprises 97% of the content. Are we there yet? --Justanother 23:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. Good point. What is the solution?--Light current 00:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The end of Wikipedia approaches as the proportion of pointless articles increases. If you look at 20 articles via "random article" how many are worth reading, i.e. "verified and notable knowledge" and how many are crap? I just did the experiment and found 5 of 20 remotely interesting or useful. The rest were info-void stubs, vanity, spam about someone's grade school or unknown rock band or a stub about a state highway. The best hope for Wiki is to work out sensible guidelines as to what is encyclopedic, then eliminate the WP:VSCA "vanispamcruftisements," WP:CB "complete bollucks" stuff only tenuously connected to reality, or WP:NFT "things made up in school one day." Edison 00:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * That's a rather unreasonable standard, to be able to pick articles at random and find them all of personal interest to you. How many paper encyclopedias would meet that standard ?  If there are lots of articles which don't interest you, don't read them, they don't do you any harm.  Many of those items you mentioned likely interest quite a few people, although not the majority. StuRat 05:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * So you marked the other 15 with a or  or  tag, right? -- Chuq 03:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * That sounds like a deletionist argument 8-)--Light current 00:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Citizendium may become so better than Wikipedia that it (Wikipedia) will eventually make no sense anymore...A.Z. 03:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC) (I wrote this, but had not signed)

Wikipedia will end with a mass exodus of most of it's users after some policy fight. That or when people realize that they cannot act on a neutral point of view as viewed from various talk pages and Afd's. I know it will involve a mass exodus. Pacific Coast Highway ''' {Gobble Gobble! • Happy Thanksgiving!} 03:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)'''

ZZZZZ. Howard Train 05:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * No ones mentioned the fact that it might be sold off and then broken up or supressed.--Light current 09:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Surely Wikipedia will end when every single encyclopaedic fact ever known has been added and edited to perfection. Keep working guys... Lemon martini 00:10, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * But there are always things happening in the world that affect Wikipedia's content. For example a new TV series is released, we make an article about it. Stuff happens and we edit existing articles to include information about whatever. That and edit wars means Wikipedia will never be static as long as it exists, unless it stops being a wiki. If it stops being a wiki we can all call it Pedia. :) Oh and to answer the question there's hundreds of ways Wikipedia could end:
 * Not enough funding to host the server
 * A world energy crisis means there's not enough electricity to waste on it
 * Nuclear holocaust
 * For some reason or another no-one bothers with Wikipedia anymore and there becomes not enough people to manage it or for it to be effective
 * End of the Internet
 * Annihilation of the human race, say by a deadly virus spread by a fast-spreading airborne extremophilic bacterium or numerous other causes
 * That wouldn't mean the end of Wikipedia, it would just mean editing stagnated until some other sentient species showed up, turned the power plants back on, rebooted the Internet, found the site and learned how to read English.  Neon    Merlin   22:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sun will expand into a red giant and consume the Earth
 * End of the universe
 * For all you know, everything that exists could be destroyed at any instant in time. You can't prove with absolute certainty otherwise! --WikiSlasher 12:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

besides a nuclear holocaust and the end of the universe....I think the most likely is that something 'cooler' comes along and users just...start ignoring wikipedia! that would be sad...--Cosmic girl 16:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

If wikipedieschatology's your thing, you might like to check out Last topic pool. Neon   Merlin   22:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Statute of limitations for a transaction
That i really should consult a lawyer notwithstanding, could anyone shed any light on whether an agreed financial transaction has a statute of limitations under law in Caliornia? So here is the deal. I agreed a fee of around $7000 for a service. The service was provided to my satisfaction and i provided my debit card to the provider as per our contract. However, the provider did not debit my account with the amount we had agreed, on the date our contract stated payment was due. Over a month has passed and the amount has still not been taken. I'm beginning to wonder whether they have forgotten completely and am wondering whether i should contact them to remind them or just wait and see what happens. Now, what i would like to know is this: am i legally liable for the amount i owe him forever - so he could wait 10 years then demand the money from me - or at some point in time does his claim expire? Thanks. Rockpock e  t  06:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * As stated above, we do not give legal advice, and it would be generally useless, since laws vary all over the place. In general, you may have to show you made a reasonable effort to inform them, such as a registered letter.  That way they can't come back at you for interest charges.  The debt can stand for a very, very long time, as many court cases have shown. --Zeizmic 13:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Assuming that you do not want to cheat the provider of a service that you are satisfied with; you should contact your bank and ask their advice. Perhaps the bank will contact him for you. If your question is about cheating him out of his money - see a lawyer. --Justanother 13:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. It's their responsibility to bill you, not the other way around. Eventually, the statute of limitations will run out. As for interest, I doubt if they would have any right to that so long as it was their negligence that caused the delay in collection. You can contact them to be a "good guy", but I doubt if you have any legal responsibility to do so. StuRat 19:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Right and, when the cashier gives you the wrong change, just put it in your pocket and walk out. Never mind that the error might come out of their pay (like it did when I worked as a cashier many years ago) and never mind that the owner of firm may really need that $7000 (and the lose comes out of his pocket). --Justanother 19:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * My statement was about legal responsibilities, which are quite distinct from moral responsibilities. However, since you bring it up, do business owners deserve to be protected from the results of their own incompetence ?  This will result in relatively more incompetent business owners, which could have other negative consequences (say when they chain all the emergency exits closed).  I would definitely argue that cashiers who are incapable of giving the correct change should find another line of work, or, at the very least, should learn to double-check their work to avoid expensive mistakes. StuRat 19:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The divorcing of "legal responsibilities" from "moral responsibilities" has led to, well, let's not get into that. In an ideal world there might be little difference, especially if we term "moral responsibilities" to be nothing more than Golden Rule. Every question of behaviour has moral implications, this one much more than most. I am of course moralising to a poster that asked a legal question but when has introducing a tangent ever stopped us here? --Justanother 20:08, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I ask myself if the table was turned, and i had paid my money but neglected to collect the goods/service as we had agreed in our contract, would the vendor go out of his or her way to ensure i got my service a month later? I seriously doubt it, infact i know if i went to demand it a month late I would probably be penalised for breaking the contract. I have no intention of trying to actively avoid paying the agreed fee, but i really don't see why i should go out of my way to help a business that can't even complete a simple credit card transaction (not to mention one rich enough that can afford to lose $7K without even noticing). If that makes me a bad person, then so be it. Thanks for your opinions, though. Rockpock  e  t  09:52, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with you, incompetence should be punished. StuRat 16:31, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Probably between 2-4 years. Will you be angrier when they come back in two years and demand payment?  That's what they can do.  As a moral question, you should make sure they get paid as soon as posssible.  Remember, they did you a favor by taking debit/credit/check instead of cash.  Tbeatty 16:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No. The money is currently available for them to take whenever they choose and will remain that way. It is not a case of trying to stop them getting their money whatsoever, now or in the future. The reason I asked was because it is likely - for completely independent reasons - the banking arrangements the card is attached to may change in the future, and I wanted to know whether one would be legally obligated to keep that account open indefinately because there is an outstanding charge on it. For the record (because there is some debate here and elsewhere on the moral implications of this question on my character), i should make it clear that this situation is actually happening to my father-in-law at the moment and there was some debate in the family on both the moral and legal implications (I used the first person when asking the question simply for ease of communication). Thus its not my decision to make, and if it was i'm not entirely sure of what i would do. Though, since this is a business contract, i'm erring towards a business ethics point of view and that is: you are legally obligated to fulfil the terms of a contract, and ethically obliged to act in the spirit of that contract. The contract says:


 * "The vendor agrees to provide a statement of charges and credits within 10 days after the service is provided. The engager agrees to pay the balance on receipt of the statement within 7 days of receipt. The engager agrees to pay a finance charge of 1.75% per week on all charges due after that date."


 * Since no receipt was received (now 31 days after the service was provided) and no payment was taken on the card provided in advance for that purpose, the vendor has broken the terms of the contract. Bearing in mind that the financial penalty should the engager break the contract is clear, theoretically, my father in law could pursue the vendor for breaking the contract and attempt to withold at least a fraction of payment in administrative charges. That seems ethically wrong to me. However, it doesn't seem ethically wrong to me to simply continue to fulfil your side of a contract (like he has done in making the entire payment available without penalty) even when the vendor has failed to uphold theirs. Sure, I guess one could pursue the vendor (at his own cost and time) - but i wonder how many people who say that should be done in principle, would actually do it in practice if they were in the situation? Especially knowing that if the shoe was on the other foot the vendor would actually impose further financial penalties rather than go out of their way to help you! As i said, if it was my money I don't know what i would do, but i'm a firm believer in reciprocal altruism. So if i'm totally honest i would probably just leave the money available, wait it out and see what transpires (like I implied in my reponse above). I guess that doesn't quite reach the moral standards of some people, but i believe its easier to extol high morals than keep them (ask Ted Haggard) and would rather be honest but flawed, than a hypocrite (not to imply anyone who commented here is.) Its looking like my father-in-law is a better man than me, though, as informing him of this debate, he is now talking about giving the vendor a call this week. Sorry about the essay, but i thought i should set the record straight. Rockpock  e  t  21:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I think you read it wrong, you are the "engager" and they are the "vendor". So, the penalty is against you for not paying 7 days after the statement of charges and credits is provided.  This seems rather one-sided, as they have no penalty listed for failing to bill in a timely manner and they also give themselves more time to bill you than you get to pay them.  Also note that 1.75% interest per week, compounded, works out to an obscene annual rate of 147% (or a mere 91% without compounding).  If you needed a reason to keep the money, such absurd terms should provide you with ample cause.  On the other hand, they can always claim they billed you and you didn't pay, then try to extract that high interest rate from you.  That would be hard for them to win in court if you can prove they were authorized to bill to your card, however. StuRat 06:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I generally agree with you, though i'm not looking for reasons to not pay them. Its just that, on a matter of principle, I don't think I'd feel obliged to go beyond what is reasonably, contractually and legally expected of me to provide renumeration. Since they were willing and able to extortionately penalise my father-in-law for reneging on his side of the contract, I not sure i'd feel a moral obligation to do them a favour and essentially reward them by reminding them to take the money, when they reneged on theirs. Thats what i mean by reciprocal altruism. I understand the contract, my point was that a better alternative would be to remind the company, but deduct from the amount owed the same amount of interest they would have charged. This seems the most balanced way to deal with it and in some ways I would actually prefer this option (except it could be considered punitive and thus perhaps ethically unjustifiable). However, since those terms are not stipulated in the contract, the vendor would simply refuse to accept the deduction and demand the full amount after the reminder. From my point of view, the money that I would gain is not even the motivating factor. I would do the same whether it was $7 or $7000. Infact, if there was a statute of limitations, I would prefer to hold the money until then and donate it to charity after its expiration, than reward a company (who penalises others for breaking contracts) for breaking a contract itself. Rockpock  e  t  07:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Cool, and kudos to your dad-in-law. It is not always easy to stand by our moral principles and temptation can be mighty tempting. I had two in recent years and, despite temptation, managed to do the right thing. The recent was sending Dell back a laptop I did not pay for and a bit further back, the other was not cashing a duplicate $1000 refund check from a cell phone provider. I will not say that I was not tempted in both cases because certainly Dell and ATT "can afford it better than me". --Justanother 21:25, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

wsup
u guyz are awesome..thanks for all the help u give us for answering our questions.the question bout the first pre historic animal on a show,,,cud the answer be the flinstones or sumthin by hanna barbera?
 * I don't know about TV-shows, and couldn't find anything older than The Flintstones in the article on Dinosaurs in popular culture, but Gertie the Dinosaur (1914) is a milestone of animated film history. ---Sluzzelin 09:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, the old King Kong movie included dinosaurs... 惑乱 分からん 10:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * According to dionosaur.org it was D. W. Griffith with Man's Genesis that is the first known movie with a dionosaur in it. This is followed by his Brute Force (check out the dinosaurs name) in 1913. They do say though that there may have been others before that. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 12:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Here's a 1917 Edison dinosaur movie you can download free:    Edison 21:24, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Sour cream
Can you freeze sour cream, thaw it, and have it taste the same as sour cream that you just bought "fresh"? Or does the freezing and thawing do something to it which is undesirable? Dismas|(talk) 11:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't know about the taste but google says no. AS does this, this and this. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 12:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Usually, you can't freeze anything that is a colloid, or a colloidal gel. The freezing disrupts structure, and separates the components. --Zeizmic 13:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I've done it, and yes, it does tend to separate, but stirring will fix that problem. StuRat 19:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks! Dismas|(talk) 21:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This is a bit late, but it also depends on the ingredients in the sour cream. If it's proper sour cream - just cream and various bacterial cultures - it will likely separate. If it's that locust bean gum-laden gel that they try to pass off as sour cream at the supermarket, it won't separate per se, but it might lose its texture and become thin. --Charlene 07:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

To prove a single status to get married outside the U.S.
I live in Buffalo, New York and I need help to apply the following certificate/letter: 1. A marriage letter/search issued by a Registrar General office to confirm that the marriage registration or there is no registration. 2. A non-impediment certificate issued by the federal office to confirm that I am free to marry because there exists no impediment to such marriage.

I look forward to receiving your reply.

Joseph


 * Dear Joseph, would you care to rewrite your question so that it makes sense? Do you want to "apply" a certificate or "apply for " one? By the way, I am unaware of any such thing. Who wants to see it? There is also no such thing as "the federal office." Marriages are matters of state law. Again, who wants to see such a thing? Where is it that you want to get married? What is your citizenship? Your bride's? B00P 14:23, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * For a non-citizen to get married, many (most?) countries require a Certificate of No Impediment to Marriage to prove that they are not already married. I applied for mine at the nearest British Embassy (I'm British), but if I still lived in the UK I would have been able to get it at my local register office. Presumably this would be the same for Americans, but you should ask the US Embassy of the country you want to get married in to make sure. Remember that if you pick up the certificate at home you may have to have it translated into the local language by some official agency (the embassy sorted all of that out for me). Ironfrost 08:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * By the way, the "Registrar General" is a Canadian office, and I suspect that Joseph wants to marry in Canada. Joseph, can you please answer BOOP's questions so that we can try to help?  Marco polo 16:09, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, if you are trying to get these certificates from Canada, *what province* are you getting them from? The regulations and requirements are startingly different from province to province, even though the database itself is federal. --Charlene 07:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

currecny exchange
I have currencies x (S$) and y ($). I wish to get currency z (pound sterling).

ideally (given no commission or fee) is it EVER advantageous to convert x -> y -> z ?

If there are very small commissions and/or fees, is x -> y -> z ever better than the direct x -> z?

I assume not.....or else people would convert till it _did_ equalize/
 * No, it's never advantageous. If you can, always prefer direct conversions from x to z instead of going through y. Currency agencies always take a small cut from the currency they convert, either by a difference in buy and sell rates, or as a straight provision. It's how they make a living. So the more conversions you make, the more money you lose. J I P | Talk 15:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes there are advantages of "juggling currencies" on a large scale where the minute differences are multiplied to much exceed the trading fees. It is called arbitrage and can be a part of forex trading. --Justanother 15:23, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

excellent, I got both the practical answer and the economics theory answer in under an hour! Thanks guys.
 * You are very welcome! --Justanother 15:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * X > Y > Z is not strictly arbitrage. -THB 00:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You would be trying to take advantage in an imbalance between the X > Y, Y > Z, and X > Z markets. While not what people traditionally think of as arbitrage it is still the same principle. --Justanother 02:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Two questions about global warming
(1) What are the two atomospheric effects of global warming? (2) Is the layer of gas thatmay be causing global warming close to the layer of ozone gases that protects us from the ulotraviolet radiation? (3) What does the word close mean in this situation?


 * We won't do your homework for you, but you can probably find the answers you need in Global warming. Philbert2.71828 17:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

There are two types of air pollution that effect global warming:

1) Greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide, allow light through but tend to reflect heat, holding the heat inside the lower atmosphere. This is the dominate effect.

2) Particulates, such as smoke, which tend to reflect or absorb sunlight in the upper atmosphere and thus prevent it from heating the Earth's surface and lower atmosphere. This is a lesser effect, somewhat reducing global warming.  Unfortunately, pollution initiatives which focus on reducing particulates exclusively may actually worsen global warming. StuRat 19:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

who owns christmas songs..
hi, i'm hoping to put together a christmas covers charity album where local bands each choose a classic christmas song, cover it in their own way then record the collection of songs, design an album cover and package and sell the result with help from local radio stations to raise money for the homeless this christmas. the problem is, i'm sure there are copyright issues to deal with, it's just i can't seem to narrow down the record companies who own the copyrights for the songs. can you help.. thanks a million jeums194.46.252.83 18:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Some are old enough to be public domain songs, while others are not. Try looking up each on Wikipedia, or elsewhere, to find out who wrote them.  If it's a recent song, then copyrights may well be an issue. StuRat 19:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * [After edit conflict] We cannot give legal advice, but as long as they are traditional Christmas songs you should be alright. Read our copyright article. (Haven't you left it a bit late for "this Christmas"?)--Shantavira 19:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Try contacting a music copyright collective like ASCAP. Rmhermen 21:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Acknowledging we do not give legal advice, check ASCAP and BMI. If by "traditional" you mean songs like Silent Night you can probably assume the song (if not a particular arrangement or performance) is public domain. If you are thinking Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer think again. You will probably need to find the copyright holder and follow the proper legal procedures, which might require obtaining rights and paying a royalty of so much per recording. The penalties are high in comparison to the royalties, and composers rightly love their payments. Edison 21:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * A little bit of searching will provide you with both lyrics and sheet music that are in the public domain. Some of them are available for free but most will charge under US$5 (or used to). These are usually scans of public domain sheets in PDF format. However, you must read the information on the site you buy the PDF from to see what their license agreement is for public performance and redistribution. As an example Sally De Ford provides free sheet music but it's her arrangment and requires you contact her for the commerical license. On the other hand Roger McGunn's might be providing free arrangments as his is available at Project Gutenberg. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:48, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Terrorstorm
Several weeks ago, the entry for the documentary Terrorstorm was deleted. As I recall, notability was one of the issues. However, I believe that was a smokescreen.

However, the film has become available via "mainstream" sources (e.g., Amazon.com, Barnes & Noble) and is currently 17th on Amazon.com's DVD sales. 

I would like to repost an article for it. GeorgeC 18:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * It was redirected. The deletion log doesn't have anything too informative.  But there is information on the page Terrorstorm redirects too (near the bottom).  You might want to work on adding cites etc to that article first (?) --Cody.Pope 19:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it looks like it used to go here: Alex Jones (radio)--Cody.Pope 19:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I was just seeking permission from an administrator. GeorgeC 19:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This is the Reference Desk. You want the Help Desk.--Shantavira 19:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, the appropriate page is WP:DRV. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

touching an lcd screen
My screen is constantly dusty so I use my shirt to wipe it off... and every once in awhile of course I push a little too hard and make it "ripple". Can this damage the screen? "Common knowledge" says yes but I can't think of any reason why anything short of piercing the screen or smashing the front so hard that it damages the electronics under the liquid crystal should damage it in any way --⁪froth T C  20:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Its the glass you are slightly distorting putting stress on the liquid hence causing the color change. I dont think this causes any damage.--Light current 21:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't mean like a calculator, I mean my laptop --⁪froth T C  23:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This site indicates that it is possible to damage the screen by touching it. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

pension?
As I approach 40 and have no pension apart from the uk state pension (uk resident), is it better to just invest in tax free ISAs (at 5%) rather than giving my money to some random pension company to invest it for me? The question is what will the difference in monthly returns be? Will a legitimate pension be worth the risk? TIA
 * This gets technical but addresses your issue, I think. Modern portfolio theory You are, of course asking about risk vs return. A weighty topic to be sure and one I am not expert on. There are tons of websites geared to the investor like Motley Fool. You should post on the boards at those sites. Not to say that someone here more knowledgable than I on the subject won't give you good advice, it is just beyond the scope of this forum, I think. --Justanother 23:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This question is more suited to an Independent Financial Adviser who can take into account all the relevant circumstances. For example, the rate of return will depend on your attitude to risk, initial commissions, and your tax environment. Your tax situation will depend on your economic activity and conjugal situation. You also need to consider your spending requirements and need to access the capital when choosing between the two. Some ISAs have performed well over the medium to longer term, but some have failed miserably. Equally, some pensions have been very disappointing. -- zzuuzz (talk) 23:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

THe best approach IMO is a company pension scheme. Failing that, you can open a personal pension that has tax advantages on the contributions. Who to choose as your pension company is a very difficult question. Go see an IFA Oh BTW expect to put a very large amount in per month at your age 8-(--Light current 23:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I have just retired aged 59 from the UK Civil Service with (thankfully) an index-linked pension that I earned over 32 years. Without that income, which amounts to 40% of my annual salary (but still subject to income-tax deductions), I would have had no other financial prospects other than the UK retirement pension, which is a variable sum depending on how many years of National Insurance a retiree has at (currently) 65 years of age. I don't want to alarm the questionner but I recently asked for a Pension Forecast from The Department of Work and Pensions and discovered that I will qualify at age 65 for the princely sum of £84 per week (taxable), and that is after contributing the full rate of N.I. for 43 years. You don't tell us what sum of contribution you could afford, but at 40 years of age, you will have to fork out a large bundle of your income in order to build up a respectable pension. So my advice would be to see a Financial Expert who is independent of any bank or other financial institution so that you get completely arbitrary advice. He will charge either an up-front fee or take a slice of any profits you make over the years from any of his recommended products. If you're unmarried at the moment, be very careful about changing that status as your spouse, should you subsequently divorce, will be entitled to a half share in any pension you do collect. Oh, you might want to consider buying Premium Bonds every month, which give you an excellent chance to win money without losing the capital. OK, you don't earn any interest so it's not an inflation proof investment but it does significantly lessen the risk of losing it all as with The National Lottery.
 * Though company pensions have added contributions, they can be seen as extremely risky. -- zzuuzz (talk) 23:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Life is extremely risky! 8-)