Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2007 June 18

= June 18 =

Eye sight
Hi, I have glasses for looking at far distance. My glasses for both eyes are +/- 1 (i forgot if it's + or -). What is my eye sight level (20/20, 20/40, etc...)? thanks. 74.111.82.91 00:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It might not answer your question exactly, but there's quite a bit of information at our Eyeglass prescription article which you may find interesting. —Steve Summit (talk) 01:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

How Much Paper is Used
How much paper is used yearly in the United States for newsprint? How about in the world? Thanks, Melissa B.70.127.162.130 00:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Information for each country is available on the FAO website, although digging through the 1000+ plus articles is diffucult. It appears that the world consumption is 30983 thousand metric tons. The USA consumed 10.299 million metric tons in 2003, according to the Newspaper Association of America: http://www.naa.org/info/facts04/newsprint-growth.html Renbelcher 01:34, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Consumer vs Professional cameras
I've noticed that the quality of a photo taken by professional cameras is much better than a consumer camera, obviously. But what is it that cameras like the Nikon D2X has that allows it to take such great photos over point-and-shoot cameras? More specifically, the lighting and mood is better and everything just seems to have a nice focus. Thanks. 74.111.82.91 04:13, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, take into consideration that not only are the optical components of a professional grade camera much better than a "point and shoot" version, resulting in better pictures, but also the people who use professional grade cameras tend to be much more skilled. An SLR camera gives the skilled photographer much more control over the composition of an image, which can result in much better results.  "Point and shoot" models tend to do everything automatically, which can produce sub-optimal results, when compared to what an educated user can produce using a quality camera. --Haemo 04:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Much lower DOF, actually... DSLR have much bigger sensors than point-and-shoots, which means they need longer focal length lenses and therefore less DOF. The public seems to be fooled by low DOF-picture, and associate shallower DOF with "pro". The larger sensor size also means much more light striking the sensor, therefore produce less noise as they have higher SNR, and can retain much more detail otherwise blurred by point-and-shoot cameras' noise reduction firmware. They also have higher dynamic range (OR), and can have less blown out areas than a point-and-shoot. But most of all it provides much more flexibility for the photographer, as he/she can control virtually everything, from manual zoom and focus to exact exposure setting. Having a good camera doesn't mean you'll get good images, but if you know how to use it effectively, it will reduce lots of workload on your side. --antilivedT 06:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, low-end models also use lower quality optical glasses for their lenses. Budget models may not use optical glass at all, and some really cheap ones use plastics. That's gotta make a difference. There's a reason optical glass is so incredibly expensive. 68.119.223.51 18:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * A professional camera lens can easily cost well over $1000. Multi-element precision ground optical glass with anti-reflection coatings. I have used the same camera with great lens and mediocre lens and the results show the difference. Edison 23:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The good news is that digital cameras now are subject to the same rapid improvements and price reductions as other digital items. In another decade or so there should be very little diff between consumer and pro cameras. Differences in results should still distinguish between a professional photographer, who knows how to frame a pic, what lighting conditions are ideal, etc., and a novice, who leaves the lens cap on. StuRat 05:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I doubt it will go as fast as Moore's law. You cannot reduce the sensor size as you cram more and more pixels in there, which is the major way how silicon chips like CPU reduce its cost. In fact, we are using bigger and bigger sensors in point-and-shoots because it's the only way to really improve the quality. Sure point-and-shoots are rapidly reducing price, but DSLRs, where they have reached some rather hard obstacles, had been quite stable for quite a while now. --antilivedT 06:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * To repeat a reply I gave to a similar question over on the science desk: It's worth taking a good look at what NASA has to say on the subject of camera design: here. In short - it's not the electronics it's the lens. Lenses don't get better/cheaper according to Moore's law - so whilst electronics improvements can go some way to getting us better photos - the lens is the critical thing.  Sure, a few years ago when consumer grade cameras were typically 640x480 resolution, the professional cameras with a couple of megapixels were mainly better because of the electronics.  But nowadays, even fairly cheap cameras have a couple of megapixels - which is overkill for anything you'll be putting up on a computer screen - and close to the resolution of most colour printers.  At this point, further improvements must come from improved lens designs.  Since good lenses are not getting cheaper at the rate that electronics are improving, I think the gap between cheap consumer cameras and more expensive professional cameras will remain. SteveBaker 11:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * As the sensors improve in sensitivity and reduce in size, it should be possible to reduce the size and cost of the lens. Eventually, I would hope for a pinhole camera with infinite focus and a quick shutter speed. StuRat 03:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * There's some fundamental physics to do with the optics required by the lens, wavelengths of light, etc, that prevent this no matter how good your sensors and electronics (as some of the others have basically said). While the people that make these things keep coming up with better designs and ways of overcoming certain problems, there are these definite physical limitations that prevent your dream camera from becoming a reality, unless they can find a way to overcome the laws of physics. --jjron 07:52, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe a pinhole can produce a "perfect" image, but at reduced brightness. The only limitation I see, then, is the ability to have small enough and sensitive enough sensors where the image is projected.  Limitations on lens optics simply don't apply, since a pinhole camera doesn't have a lens. StuRat 19:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Stu, the fundamental limits of diffraction and photon shot noise unfortunately do apply also to pinhole cameras. As the article on pinhole camera explains, the resolution of a pinhole camera involves a tradeoff between blurring due to pinhole size (which is severe when a large pinhole is used) and blurring due to diffraction (which is severe with small pinholes). This tradeoff leads to an optimum pinhole size of about $$d=1.9\sqrt{f \lambda}$$, where f is the distance from the pinhole to the film or detector. That optimal pinhole size (for a given f) yields an minimum resolvable angle on the order of $$s=\frac{d}{f}=1.9\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{f}}$$. Note that f is in the denominator: this optimal resolution gets very bad for small f (small cameras). To yield a good resolution, comparable to lens-based cameras, a pinhole camera must therefore be very large, with a large distance from the pinhole to the film. For example, consider a random camera objective like this Canon 35mm f/2; it has good contrast well beyond a resolution of 40 line pairs/mm, corresponding to a resolved angle s of less than (1/40)mm/35mm = 0.71 milliradians. To get similar resolution, a pinhole camera would have to have a length greater than $$f = \left (\frac{1.9}{s} \right )^2 \lambda = 3.5$$ meters for $$\lambda = 0.5 \mu m$$! Any electronic detector for such a camera would also have to be extremely large, to maintain the desired angular field of view (2.4 x 3.6 meters (!) to get the same field as the 35 mm objective gets with 35 mm film). The sensitivity of the detector is also fundamentally limited: the best it can possibly do is to record the precise position of each photon that reaches it. If the number of photons that get through the pinhole is insufficient for good statistics, the image will necessarily be noisy due to photon shot noise, for any detector. (To see that intuitively, consider a case when only two or three photons get through; no detector could produce a very interpretable image from that...) A pinhole that is much smaller than a typical camera lens aperture, and thus lets through much fewer photons, will therefore yield noisy images at normal exposure times, even with an ideal detector. Sorry. --mglg(talk) 06:38, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

U.S. border agents Attacked by "hostiles"
Did you know this is going on ? This is on FOX News RIGHT NOW. Agents are being attacked by rocks and the like, incl. Molotov Cocktails. I'm watching this RIGHT NOW. Will this be appropriate for any articles ? 205.240.144.168 04:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what you're talking about, but if the incident is at all notable, it will probably show up somewhere. We're not a "breaking news" sort of place, though.  --Haemo 04:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It was on "Hannity's America". Now' they're showing Michael Moore's "B.S.". 205.240.144.168 04:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * One U.S. border agent had to KILL a illegal alien as he attempted to heave a LARGE rock at him. 205.240.144.168 04:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Is there a article discussing "Hannity's America" ? 205.240.144.168 04:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Look - just chill. We're an encyclopedia, not a news source.  Even the CNN and Fox News websites doesn't appear to have a story about this -- it's almost certain that no reliable sources currently exist about this incident.  --Haemo 04:32, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The show may "re-run" on the FOX News network real shortly. 205.240.144.168 04:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * (deindent) Well, we'll give it a while to see what happens. --Haemo 04:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a news site. When it's really immediately obvious that an event will still be widely talked about years from now, there is benefit to making a start on an article early on.  However, it's generally better to wait until we can have all of the facts clearly in hand - and know for sure that this was truly a notable historical event.  If you feel a burning need to write a balanced, neutral article (not a diatribe about the evils of illegal immigration - and not a rant about the brutality of US border guards) - then write a piece for Wikinews instead.  If it turns out that this event triggers a major change in US policy and becomes as famous as (say) race riots in the '60s - then you'll still be hearing people talk about it a year from now.  If that happens then use the Wikinews piece as the basis of a Wikipedia article.  If (as seems likely), this will be a story in the news for a day or two - then go largely forgotten - then no Wikipedia article is required. SteveBaker 10:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * sorry, but what exactly do you mean by deindent? -Dixie48 01:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It's the opposite of indent; it's also called "outdent". --  JackofOz 02:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * More specifically - saying '(deindent)' at the beginning of a Wikipedia talk post says "I mean to reply to the previous poster - but if I indent my reply again from that post, it will be squashed up too much to the right - so I'm going to leave off the indentation so that subsequent answers will remain readable."  It's common to do this when there are six or more ':'s at the start of the previous reply. SteveBaker 10:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * And it would be less necessary if folks would more consistently indent according to what they're responding to, rather than according to what they're responding after. &mdash;Tamfang 05:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Maybe we need some Wikipedia indentation guidelines. I'll get my teeth into that project when I get a moment.  :)   JackofOz 22:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Eastern table manners
hi, Please pardon me for asking this question here, but I could not find the answers in the google. Iam an easterner living in the western world and trying to become westernized. I unknowingly offend people while eating with glug, slurp and belching noises. Closing the mouth doesnt help either. Please help me eradicate these problems.

-wanna bE A weSTERNER 131.220.115.227 08:45, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It would probably be a good idea to go to a local bookstore and try to find an etiquette book. Slightly more seriously, if you have a hard time helping yourself, there are professional etiquette coaches out there that will help you with this -- Phoeba WrightOBJECTION! 08:51, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Do you have any western friends? Perhaps they would be willing to give you some pointers.  Dismas |(talk) 09:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

drinking slowly helps, just a little bit at a time.


 * Agreed. Eat and drink slowly, and chew with the mouth closed.  Also keep your elbows off the table and don't eat food with your hands (with a few exceptions, generally for casual eating, like pizza and tacos).  If you must belch, cover your mouth while doing so and try to make it as quiet as possible. StuRat 05:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * See our article on Etiquette in Canada and the United States (I'm assuming Eastern = European and Western is North American. Although it could be east europe to west europe).--GTPoompt (talk) 12:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Eastern can also mean Asian too.


 * Also avoid foods that are difficult to eat without slurping. Things like chicken feet and noodles are popular in parts of Asia where slurping isn't considered an etiquette horror. Otherwise, just watch yourself like a hawk. Pay attention while you're eating to how you eat. When you catch yourself doing something wrong, pay more attention for the rest of the meal. It's easy to fall into old habits, but you have to actually pay attention to break them.


 * Breaking habits is difficult but it can't be done. If you pay attention and practise, some day you will eat without belching, ever: without slurping, ever: and without glugging, ever. Then you'll go back home for a visit and everyone will laugh at you. -- Charlene 19:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that the key here is simply to avoid sucking foods into your mouth when you are eating. Instead, take some of the food with your spoon or fork, place it inside your mouth, close your mouth, and remove the food from the spoon or fork with your lips, tongue, or teeth.  No one is supposed to be able to observe the sounds or sights that accompany your actual ingestion of food.  Bodily functions are somewhat taboo in Western culture.  For this reason, you should try to avoid belching in public, but if you feel that a belch cannot be avoided, keep your mouth closed while you are belching and let the gas pass through your nose.  You can avoid having to belch by not taking in air with your food.   Marco polo 21:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

where to get the best FX rates in London?
I have currencies of various kinds I'd like to get changed into pounds sterling - euros, chinese yuan, thai baht. where should i go on the high street in london to get the best foreign exchange value? the post office? the bank which I have my current account? any ideas? thanks very much for suggestions....
 * Banks would probably give the best rates, but I don't think you'd get a better rate for having a current account with them. I have always found Thomas Cook to give good rates as well.  Large branches of Marks & Spencer also do foreign exchange, and it would be worth checking them out too.  Whatever you do, unless you're really desperate, don't use the small, anonymous "one guy behind a window" outfits you see all over the place in London.  For sure they will give the worst rates. --Richardrj talkemail 11:23, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Apparently The Post Office is very good for selling foreign money to, and you could wait until the exchange rate rises, then you would get more wherever you go.


 * Indeed: the Post Office doesn't charge commission, so in theory they should be cheapest. Laïka  22:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * You shouldn't just take commission into account: you should also take into account the "spread" of the exchange rates. Some places advertise "no commission", but they have very poor exchange rates. (I've no idea whether the Post Office is good or bad as regards FX so can't advise on that.)--A bit iffy 23:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

project related basic querries
sir, i m a final year electronics engineering student.i need to know something about certain project topics and also the contents in MICROPROCESSORS which i want to opt for my project.please help.

sachindra narayan
 * It's not entirely clear what you're asking, but you should read our article Microprocessor and then come back to us with any more specific questions. --Richardrj talkemail 12:56, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Webb Ellis
when was rugby first introduced at schools —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.139.165 (talk • contribs)
 * The article Football should give you some information of this. There is not really a definitive answer, because at one stage, there was just football, before soccer broke away to leave rugger.  Neither sport was properly codified for years after they had been established at various public schools in England. You may need to draw your own conclusion.  slυмgυм [ ←→ ] 16:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Rugby School makes it clear that Webb Ellis' contribution to the invention of the game is a myth. But it's also evident that the essence of the modern game did come about at Rugby school.  This isn't a game where someone sat down one day, wrote a set of rules and had children start playing it.  It evolved over many generations of schoolboys with the rules changing in an ad-hoc manner.  Precisely which of these variations should be called 'Rugby' is largely a matter of opinion - so the exact date is also a matter of opinion.  What we can say though is that the game was never "introduced at schools" - the kids invented the game themselves - possibly in a number of different schools. SteveBaker 10:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Equivalent of Matric in Zimbabwe
What is the equivalent of Matric, Grade 12 ,11,etc in Zimbabwe?


 * They use the A level system as found in the UK. Grade 12 and 13 are the sixth form (lower and upper, respectively). Do we need an Education in Zimbabwe article? Natgoo 21:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The Fuzzy Wuzzy English Children's Rhyme.
Who created the Fuzzy Wuzzy children's rhyme? I've been wondering, but I can't seem to find the answer anywhere.

Thank you for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.203.208 (talk • contribs)


 * I been looking around but I can't find the answer either.--A bit iffy 23:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Please take a look at Fuzzy Wuzzy and Kipling's poem on the same topic at Wikisource . "'E's the on'y thing that doesn't give a damn For a Regiment o' British Infantree!" (Do you enjoy Kipling?)Edison 00:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't know.I've never Kippled.hotclaws 08:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Kipple? V-Man - T/C 22:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

California State Prison
I am looking for a name(s) of a prison where inmates with mental problems would go in California. I am looking for my father who has dementia and I believe he is in a southern California prison
 * Wouldn't there be a perfectly legal and proper way to find out where your father is being held? I'd try the police first, I'm pretty sure that just about in any western country you have the right to know where your next of kin is being held if they are incarcerated. Vespine 22:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The California Department of Corrections maintains a list here. The California Medical Facility has a medical psychiatric unit, so he might be there, although it is located in northern California.  If your father is in federal prison, you'll need to try the Federal Bureau of Prisons website. –Pakman044 00:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

FYI, Vespine, I was adopted so it would be hard to obtain this information...