Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 November 30

= November 30 =

Exactly HOW are we thrown into existence!?
Does anyone realize how scary this is? From absolute nowhere-to right here, right now! By an existence creating (whaaa...?)force that only takes questions with the price/risk of driving existencee insane. There was no "you" to say "I think I'll just wait around here in a zero gravity, zero mass, timeless unvoid and wait to exist." or "It sure was fun waiting around in a mathematically unexpressionable nothingness, but hey- everyone's gotta exist sometime." But suddenly, without warning, you did. Of course there'd be no "you" to warn anyways. See how baffling this is? Assuming it's a natural occurance without the help of a God, or reincarnation, the question is - HOW!? How does something, a consciousness no less, appear from the seas of nothingfinity? What emergent property is responsible? What is the exact process to make...(???!)....emerge into something that says "Whoah, I exist! Now how did this happen?"--Dr. Carefree (talk) 00:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The simple answer to how you exist is to be found in sexual reproduction and DNA. What you're really getting at is when did the person "you" come into existence, which is really a question about what it means to be a "person", what it means to be "conscious". We don't have a good answer for that but it's definitely some sort of emergent neurological behavior. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * There may be more to it than that, but if so, it's unprovable. Such is the stuff of metaphysics.  Marco polo (talk) 02:23, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure it IS that sudden. I think it takes YEARS for consciousness to develop after birth.  Only a few people claim to have solid memories from before a couple of years of age - and those that do may be "unreliable witnesses" or are falling victim of "received memories"...things that never happened or were not remembered until a parent or sibling 'planted' the memory at a later age.  It's pretty clear from recent science that consciousness isn't "in control" of our behavior - it merely monitors what lower brain functions are doing.  So we don't need consciousness in order to function (indeed - plenty of much simpler animals don't appear to posess this mental property - so there is no reason to assume we have it at birth.  So - no bafflement - consciously grows as we do and dies when we do.  More importantly, no sudden "aha!" moment when consciousness turns on - just a gradual growth and a fuzzy increase in the importance of the faculty. SteveBaker (talk) 04:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Consciousness is not necessarily such a shocking and unusual thing as you seem to think Dr. Carefree. We have no experience with anything else, save perhaps the lower level brain functioning that Steve is talking about, so we have nothing to compare it to. How do we know that self awareness is such a special thing? We may think it is, but our own perceptions are not objective or necessarily trustworthy. Also, I am reminded of a passage from the Dhammapada:


 * We are what we think.


 * All that we are arises with our thoughts.


 * With our thoughts we make the world.


 * How do we know that the universe isn’t created by our conciseness instead of the other way round? Finally I want to point out a principle of cosmology that is applicable here: It seems likely that there are few points in the universe where human life could have originated. How is it that against immense odds we happen to be on a planet with a suitable temperature, atmosphere, etc? Easy, we can only observe from where we actually do exist, therefore the odds don’t mater. Similarly the fact that against odds of trillions you and me—the atoms that compose our bodies—happen to be configured into conscious beings is simply a reflection of the fact that were they not, we wouldn't be considering the fact that things could be otherwise. Hope that helps you iron out your existential crisis. :) --S.dedalus (talk) 06:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

A thought isn't a religious thing. Scientifically a thought is just a chemical reaction in your brain. We do not currently have information or the technology to discover how exactly the brain works. What we do know is that the brain is a large combination of atoms that somehow forms a consciousness and and is capable of reason. The reason a dog, for example, is incapable of reason is simply because of the combination of atoms in in their skull. Also S.dedalus, look at the arcticle on Solipsism. Strifeblade (talk) 17:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, Cogito ergo sum. --S.dedalus (talk) 21:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

It's hard to deny that many animals have a greater sense of consciousness than a neonate. People with pets often strongly believe in the "self-ness" of their dogs/cats/whatever, non-human apes have been taught certain levels of language... Humans aren't unique in having an "us." It's just hard to imagine that which we can never experience... zafiroblue05 | Talk 20:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

guns
What are the latest rifeles that have been developed and the characters of them —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.38.180 (talk) 03:47, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Didn't want you to be an orphan, so here goes – in the article Rifle you get recent decades – military and what they can achieve – and what's popular among civilians (the AR-15 and the AK-47) and if you scroll down there's a list of kinds of rifles. Hope it helps, Julia Rossi (talk) 12:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello sir ("Basic Television System" ?)
What is "Basic Television System" in the subject "Television Production"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.209.44 (talk) 04:34, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Our Television production link is a redirect to Production company, which doesn't mention a "Basic Television System". Are you sure that was the name of the article ? StuRat (talk) 07:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I also searched Wikipedia for the phrase "Basic Television System" and couldn't find it: . StuRat (talk) 07:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems that this question may stem from a media educational course of some type.  This site says "In its simplest form, the system consists of a television camera that converts what it sees into a video signal, a microphone that converts what it hears Into an audio signal, and a television set and loudspeaker that reconvert the two signals Into pictures and sound."  A diagram and explanation can be found here.  152.16.16.75 (talk) 11:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

natural predators - head lice
Do head lice have any natural predators?


 * Nit combs? :-) Seriously though, the Treatment of human head lice article doesn't mention any natural predators that would be useful in the treatment of head lice, though I suppose you could "employ" a chimpanzee and try to get it to groom you. Astronaut (talk) 12:19, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Red-billed Oxpecker? If you don't mind it pecking holes in your scalp at the same time, that is. The sensation of the beak striking against your skull is probably not that pleasant either. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 12:35, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I suspect that such a bird has evolved, say with a dull beak tip, so as not to upset the ox and lose it's meal. StuRat (talk) 16:18, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I suspect you haven't read Red-billed Oxpecker. They cherish the open wounds that provide the lovely meal of blood. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 17:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I think that wounds made by dull instruments tend to be more painful in the immediate sense. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * What might prove painful for a human may be a very minor discomfort for an ox -  but I think we've moved off the point.I would have thought ants might make a good job of clearing lice. Richard Avery (talk) 07:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Great apes eat lice, picked off each other. I believe there are instances of apes grooming humans too. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 15:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * A primate advancing with a can of natural fly spray would be predacious enough. Julia Rossi (talk) 08:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you plan to eat the headlice afterwards?? AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 11:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Only if you're (s) p (r) aying, ARF. :) Julia Rossi (talk) 12:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You can also pick lice eggs off each other, although that's a lousy thing to do while nitting. StuRat (talk) 13:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It would appear that humans are the greatest predator of head lice, although not generally in the sense that we consume them. See Lice Capades for an illustration. --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  15:03, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, there certainly are a lot of nitpickers right here at the Ref Desk. :-) StuRat (talk) 02:12, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

The next Golden Goose?
Following on from past (now collapsing) meteoric rises in the share values of manufacturers of bottled water (in countries like the UK where ordinary tap water has proved to be of better quality and taste than bottled): and share value rises (and subsequent collapse) in the so-called Dot-Com bubble; and more recently in the USA-led Sub-prime mortgage and banking scam - does anyone here (or historical precedent) have any scent of what industry, commodity, utility, or service provider sector might be the next Golden Goose in which I can invest my spare capital after selling all my junk bonds, collapsed shares, and (now) zer0-interest-earning investments? 92.10.162.179 (talk) 11:32, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Action houses that sell off all the stock and other assets of companies that go into liquidation? --Tango (talk) 15:55, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * You seem to be aiming to invest in a "bubble", with the goal of getting out before the bubble collapses. The problem with this approach is that most people don't get out in time (has this worked for you in the past ?).  The huge growth while the bubble is inflating may be seductive, most investors earn more money at the end of the day by putting their money in investments with solid growth potential.  For example, while everyone can get by just fine without bottled water, once the fad ends, people aren't likely to skip food anytime soon, so maybe invest in a food company. StuRat (talk) 16:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * And, if you insist on risky investments, I suggest stocks which are currently at the bottom, like General Motors. Barring bankruptcy and collapse, which seems unlikely due to government intervention, GM stock can't go much lower and is likely to rise considerably StuRat (talk) 16:15, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Given the current situation I think a lot of stocks are likely to rise considerably. Whether GM is a good investment in terms of risk/reward I can't answer Nil Einne (talk) 11:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It probably depends largely on what form a possible bail out would take - will the existing stock maintain it's value or will it all essentially be written off and the company be all-but nationalised? --Tango (talk) 12:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * In the US, when anything is nationalized, the stockholders would be compensated. The kind of nationalization that leaves the owners with nothing is more like what happens after a communist revolution. StuRat (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, but would they be compensated with the value of their stock before or after it collapsed? Algebraist 14:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * After, and those who bought when the stock price was high have lost a lot of money. However, if you buy when the stock price has already collapsed, it's unlikely to go down much further, especially if the gov will work to prevent this, but there is the potential for massive stock price growth, if the company recovers.  So, you have the best of both worlds, the potential for huge stock price gains with only limited risk.  StuRat (talk) 01:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I hate to be a sober-talking killjoy but let me just say that seeking investment ideas from random strangers on the Internet is a really bad idea. The proper investment for you depends on your current financial situation, goals, and risk tolerance. I recommend talking to a financial planner. —D. Monack talk 23:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * And also...why would we consider bottled water firms a bad investment? Ignoring that most of the bottled water brands (I know of) appear to be attached to massive food producing companies, is there any evidence that the sales of bottled water are plummeting as the 'credit crunch' bites home? I have to say 99% of my bottled water purchases are when i'm in the city/away from a free-tap and want refreshment. Yeah I could be organised and bottle some up before I go, but bottled water costs (usually) 75p-£1 a bottle, realistically I would be looking to make savings somewhere that would save me more. I suspect bottled water sales will dip (perhaps inline with reduced consmer spending) but I wouldn't expect it to be hurt more than other bottled drinks such as coca-cola etc. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

im new to this 'buying a car thing'...
i will be back home in about 7 more months, and i'll be looking to buy my first 'new car'. it's a $32,000 car, and if my credit isn't exacly platinum (cough cough), and i put say....$10,000 down payment, what do you think i can expect my monthly payments to be? oh, my credit score is around 597 last time i checked =/


 * In 7 months time? No way to know - the credit markets are going haywire at the moment so there's no way to know what they'll be doing in 7 months time. I can tell you this, though - your monthly payments will be zero if you buy a car that costs $10,000, if your credit rating is already poor you might want to consider the frugal approach. --Tango (talk) 13:54, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed. This whole "buy now, pay later" approach is how the world got into the current financial crisis, and, I suspect, how you got your bad credit rating.  Both nations and individuals should try living within their means, for a change.  You can buy a used car for $10,000 that does everything a car needs to do, without going further into debt. StuRat (talk) 16:05, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * There's nothing wrong with using credit per se, though it can tempt you to pay more for an item than you would if you were laying out cash. Consider that many if not most auto loans in the U.S. are "under water" -- the remaining loan balance is more than the car is worth, so there's no trade-in or resale value.  (Conversely, as the Car Guys point out, if you never sell your car, there's no such thing as depreciation.)
 * Rates for auto loans in the U.S. (not that that's where you are, OP) vary, but they do get higher as your credit score gets lower. 1/3 down is a pretty fair down payment, but as Tango says, it's impossible to say today what interest rates will be in seven months, regardless of your credit score.  Just now bankrate.com was suggesting an average of 6.83% for a 48-month new car loan.  Amortizing $20,000 at 6.8% interest on a 48-month loan would require a payment around $477.  If instead you could set aside $450 a month for 18 months (and if you can't, maybe the loan is ill-advised), at the end of a year and a half you'd have $18,100 (your original $10,000, plus an additional $8,100), not including interest.  While you couldn't buy a $32,000 car, you could pay cash for any of several well-regarded small cars (e.g., a Honda Civic, Hyundai Elantra, Volkswagen Rabbit).  With no car payment, you could set aside, say, $300 a month for the eventual replacement.  Eight or ten years of $300 a month, plus interest, and you'll be driving in style.  Disclaimer: I am biased; I haven't had a car payment since May of 1996.  --- OtherDave (talk) 16:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * And I've never made a car payment. This means my first 6 cars were all used, but, as a result, now I can afford to buy new cars outright, and my last 2 were purchased as such.  I disagree with "There's nothing wrong with using credit per se".  Credit requires that you make assumptions about your future income and financial obligations which are likely to be incorrect, as the future is essentially unknowable.  Thus, any credit purchase is inherently risky.  Only if the benefit outweighs this risk is use of credit wise.  I would say it almost always makes sense to borrow money for education (I did this), do to the high rate of return, and can make sense to borrow money for a SMALL first home (I didn't do this) due to skipping rent and most homes appreciating in the long term.  Any other credit purchase seems unwise, to me.  Save your money instead and buy the item when you can afford it on your own. StuRat (talk) 18:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The other time credit makes sense is in an emergency - if you suddenly need to buy something quickly (a flight half way around the world to deal with the death of a relative overseas, say) and you don't have the money on hand (obviously, having savings for emergencies is a better choice, but if too many emergencies happen at once you could use up your savings - say you lost your job a few months earlier and haven't been able to find a new one yet) then you have little choice but to borrow it. That's one of the main reasons for ensuring that you have a good credit history - it gives you access to credit when your really need it. If you ruin your credit history borrowing for luxuries (and any car that costs more than $10,000 is a luxury), then what will you do when things turn bad? (Remember, even if you make all your payments on time, just having a large amount of credit will damage your credit rating.) --Tango (talk) 21:20, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * There are lots of alternatives to borrowing money from banks for emergencies:


 * 1) Borrow from friends or relatives instead. At least they usually aren't out to make a profit at your expense.


 * 2) Sell some of your stuff. For a small amount, sell old bicycles, sports equipment, snowmobiles,  etc.  For larger amounts, sell off cars or move to a smaller house.


 * 3) Is it REALLY an emergency ? Having your cable TV cut off is NOT an emergency, but insulin needed for your diabetes is.


 * For many people who have lost their jobs, the only sustainable option is to lower their expectations and lifestyle to match their current means. Living on credit to maintain the old lifestyle will work for a short period, but will end up in disaster, possibly homelessness. StuRat (talk) 06:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * If you lose your job, the answer is to live off your savings (which should be enough to last you a few months at your current spending levels) while looking for a new job. If it becomes clear that you won't find a new job before your savings run out, then you lower your expectations (both in terms of what jobs you'll go for and how much you'll spend). My example was when an emergency comes up while you're in the living off savings part of the process so you can't use the savings to fund the emergency. Borrowing off friends and relatives can be an option if you have friends and relatives that can afford it, but even then such deals can end up ruining a relationship. Selling assets is certainly a good move if you have things you don't need, but that will probably only cover small emergencies. Downsizing your house takes a long time, so isn't a good way to deal with an emergency (it's a good way to pay off the debt you built up dealing with the emergency, though). And yes, obviously "emergency" means something you essentially have no choice but to deal with, loss of a luxury is not an emergency. (Of course, insulin for your diabetes ought to be paid for with insurance (or a public health service), relying on savings or credit to pay for medical care is a really bad idea.) --Tango (talk) 12:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * This information is based on my UK experience, the USA may differ but buying a new car is essentially a dumb move. You typically lose anything between 10-20% of the car's value as soon as you drive it out of the dealer. You also have to pay any sales taxes and other charges that may apply to buying new. Depreciation means that in after 3 years your car will be worth about half what you paid for it. In the UK the optimum age for buying used is 3 years old - this is when car fleets dispose of their cars and their are lots available at auction - the USA market may vary but it's a good ballpark. Exxolon (talk) 00:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * While I mostly agree with 3, I would say it usually makes sense to borrow money, if you are SURE you can pay it off on time, to pay of any outstanding debts and bills because if you let them get overdue or sent to collection agencies that will count against you in your credit rating. Of course, ideally you should cancel unnecessary luxuries before it gets to there and definitely if you are having to borrow to pay them, it very likely makes sense to cancel such luxuries. (In other words, cancel cable TV = good, getting your cable TV cut off because you didn't pay the bill = not so good Nil Einne (talk) 11:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, if you're already in the situation of having debts you can't pay, then consolidating them if often a good move. The better move is not to get into that position in the first place. --Tango (talk) 12:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

there is any website focused on music videos??
I am not talking about websites like http://www.mvdbase.com/ that list the music videos that exist, i am talking about a website that there is music videos to see. There is youtube, but in youtube if you want to see a music video you need to know the name of the band, on a music video website you can just open a website and start to watch some official music videos, without needing to know what you want to see this is more difficult on youtube since there is not only music video there and there are many non official music videos. I want one the dont have only mainstream artists.


 * http://www.singingfool.com has a random video feature. They only have a fraction of what YouTube has, but it's a start.Sunburned Baby (talk) 16:01, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks guy, that what I was looking for.

Vincilagnia
The article bondage (BDSM) says "The paraphilia of being sexually aroused by bondage is called vincilagnia." I have been interested in bondage for many years, but this is the first time I've heard of the word "vincilagnia". What is vincilagnia exactly? I am certainly interested in seeing women in bondage, and the prospect of tying women up myself interests me even more. Does this make me a vincilagniac? Note that even though I'm not opposed to being bound myself, when it comes to other people being bound, it's strictly women only. Furthermore, what is the etymology of the word "vincilagnia" itself? J I P | Talk 20:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * From vincio, to bind or fetter with chains, and lagneia, lust. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * For a collection of -lagniae on Wikipedia, there are algolagnia (including the subparaphilia phalloorchoalgolagnia), melolagnia, odaxelagnia, sthenolagnia, and urolagnia. I think the construction -lagniac for the person is correct, see algolagniac, for example. I doubt there are commonly used one-word latin terms distinguishing between your particular preferences within vincilagnia from other vincilagniacs. ---Sluzzelin talk  21:22, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Adriana Lima section
Can someone please help me out in this section linked below. A certin member is correcting something that does not need correcting. He is doing a bit of math wrong and putting a wrong date on the page of Adriana Lima as you can see the discussion below http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Adriana_Lima#The_actual_year_Lima_began_modeling_for_VS.3F

US Fiscal Policy
Hi, Does anyone have a link to a website for information on the US fiscal policy with actual figures of what they're spending? I've searched the internet but can't find anything with actual figures. Thanks. 92.2.28.178 (talk) 21:14, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * are all of the CBO publications in the last 90 days. You'll probably find what you're looking for there.  I think the first TARP audit is due soon (or maybe was already issued late in the week).  NByz (talk) 23:09, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Try this recently created government site: http://usaspending.gov/. I also recommend this site: http://www.washingtonwatch.com/ .—D. Monack talk 10:32, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Calf stretches
What are some good calf stretches for those who habitually run on concrete? Anything for the Achilles tendon, tibialis anterior, soleus, gastrocnemius, shins in general, etc. Thanks in advance. --AtTheAbyss (talk) 22:26, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

P.S. I'm running to get in shape for the USMC, so the sooner I can get some good leg stretches, the sooner I can really begin running in earnest. Thanks again.
 * Runners' advice forums on the Internet will probably offer testimonial advice, although this may not apply in individual cases and you run the risk of being misled especially if you have any undiagnosed or latent musculoskeletal problems. Have you been evaluated by an orthopedist or sports medicine specialist? A qualified coach or physical therapist might be other knowledgeable sources to approach. Considering the demands on a Marine recruit, a health professional's advice at the outset of your training might streamline your achievements and help avoid injury. There's also the issue of suiting the shoe to that surface. -- Deborahjay (talk) 23:14, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Background to this is found in Running and Stretching, and google offering videos, forums, and tips on calf stretching is here. One of the articles suggests varying your preferred running surface (esp if it's concrete) with other types. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:36, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Before beginning a cattle drive, it's good to roust the cattle (each cow, bull, and calf), so they have a chance to mill about for a few minutes and stretch their legs before the drive begins. This ensures that no muscle injuries occur. :-) StuRat (talk) 06:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * And if they do, it seems a useful precaution to have calf stretchers handy, so the paramedics may transport the bovines to the vet´s surgery in a comfortable supine position. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 09:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I knew a woman who drove 350 miles with a calf in the trunk of her car. When she arrived, it needed considerable cleaning and soothing as well as stretching. Edison (talk) 06:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Temple Grandin got her idea for a hug machine from seeing calves put in squeeze boxes though that's the opposite idea. Still it might inspire something?  Julia Rossi (talk) 07:46, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's probably worth noting that a lot of research lately has called into question the value of stretching before exercise in reducing injury and improving performance. Our article Stretching has something on this, but not much. I'd advise looking through the online archives at nytimes.com. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)