Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 October 27

= October 27 =

Infant Mortality Rate, Under-5 Mortality Rate, and Death Rate (cont.)
I mean, what was the infant mortality, under-5 mortality rate, and death rate before the health improvements of modern times? And stop giving irrelevant answers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.166.196 (talk) 00:43, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * When? Where? "Before modern times" is not specific enough. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:56, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking that aswell, how do you define "modern times" and where? Sorry if this is an "irrelivant answer." W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 00:59, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I looked in the archives and I see you are looking for the infant mortality rate in ancient times and the Middle Ages. I also saw the hideously irrelevant answers/comments written for which I feel a duty to apologise on behalf of my fellow Wikipedia contributors.

I'm not sure how much reaserch you have done on this but this shouldn't be your first point of call (I'm not assuming is was). A quick search on google gives good results, but if you don't wish to use google there are many search engines out their that give good results (e.g. ask.com).

After a bit of quick reaserch I have found that the highest estimated percentage is about 50% death rate, although 30% is the more common figure. These figures include the high number of infants who died within days after birth from little-understood and wholly unpreventable illnesses that modern science has now overcome. I suggest you take a brief look at this, it seems very helpful. For peasants, 5% of infants died during birth with another 10-12% dying in their first month! See this

There are many other sites that offer a lot of information, these are just two I picked out, but I seriously suggest you search "infant mortality rate in the Middle Ages" in Google. There are many sites out there offering the information, but it would take me ages to sum them up for you here and provide links.

I seriously hope that was helpful, and just ask if you have any more questions. I learnt a lot in my search, so I'm happy. :) W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 01:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

What was the death rate before the health improvements of modern times? When you said 50% or 30%, did you mean under-5 mortality or infant mortality? Whichever one you mean, what about the other? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.166.196 (talk) 00:53, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Please, "Google" Your question, click infant mortality rate in the middle ages or under 5 mortality rate in the middle ages. You can also use any other search engine You prefer (see List of search engines). CapitalRSL (talk) 07:44, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Pissarro the Impressionist Painter
What is the name and date of painting of the Pissarro painting of a young woman which appears on the first page of the Pissarro entry; being the painting at the top of the block containing three paintings? Thank you in advance. Malcolm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.162.100.79 (talk) 02:25, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Pissaro has painted many young women, could it be...


 * Young Woman Washing Plates
 * Young Peasant Girl with Stick
 * Young Woman Bathing Her Feet
 * Two Young Peasant Women
 * Portrait of a Young Woman
 * Young Woman and Child at the Well

The titles pretty much describe what is in the paintings. W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 03:02, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Presumably the questioner means the top painting in the article Camille Pissarro (see right). It's called "Café au Lait".

It is much more helpful with this picture, but in my defence before that I didn't know where to find the picture to find it's name (as he didn't say to go to the Camille Pissarro article), so I just named a few of the many pictures of Pissarro's with a young girl.W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 04:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Not that anyone cares about your defence, but – What did you think was meant by "the Pissarro entry"? —Tamfang (talk) 05:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I thought it might be a book or something, that's why when I googled it I came up with nothing so just listed a few of Pissaro's painting that matched the description of having a young woman. The idea that it might be a book seemed to make sense because he said "the first page". Usually if talking about an article on Wikipedia, one would write "the Pissaro article" or "Wikipedia's Pissaro article". Also it isn't hard to link to an article, so that is what I would have expected when referring to one. W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 15:19, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Artists and thier movements
I have been reading about artists recently, but have exausted my knowlege, I would please like a list of artists and thier movements. I have read Picaso, Gaugan, Pissaro, Turner, Mattis, Surealism, immpresionism, post impresionism, cubism (not so good) Realism. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 12:03, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * If i might be allowed to clarify, I would like a list of art movements cronologically listed. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 12:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Art periods gives what you desire. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.172.19.20 (talk) 12:56, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Cheapest way to heat water.
I am going to move my washing machine into my non-house-attached garage (UK) where there is currently no water supply or drainage but there is an electricity supply. So, I have the option to either install ONLY Cold water or Hot and Cold supply pipes. Question, and leaving the plumbing considerations to one side, given that my domestic hot water is heated by a storage-tank-free mains gas combi-boiler (meaning I only heat what I immediately need), will it be cheaper to heat the washing machine water from cold to my usual washing temp. of 60 degrees by Gas, or Electricity? Thanks. 92.23.178.75 (talk) 12:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC) 92.23.178.75 (talk) 12:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know about the efficiencies of different heating methods, but I do know it's rarely necessary to do laundry at 60deg. You'll save far more energy by washing at 40 or even 30 than you ever would be using a more efficient heating method. --Tango (talk) 13:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I have always been under the impression that you should use gas as it will be cheaper. Now this was true a couple of years ago, but the recent rises in the cost of fuel might make that belief outdated.

Also, just to repeat Tango's point, you really shouldn't wash your clothes at 60. I've never used a washing macine so I don't really know much about washing machine water temperatures, but most things (if not everything) should be able to wash at 30 to 40. Without trying to advertise, Ariel Excel can wash clothes at 15 degrees (although I don't know if you can only wash certain things at this temp.). W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 15:04, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't know muchg about washing either... but my wife for years has only used cold water and Persil. Her results are sparkling clean.86.197.168.115 (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC)DT
 * I'll echo the answer other people gave. Washing at 30-40 degrees centigrade will give a fine results unless you've been rolling through the mud and let it dry for three weeks. What kind of washing machine do you own? I could be wrong, but I think the one in my house imports cold water and does the heating itself. - Mgm|(talk) 17:09, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Certainly gas ...but: Regular washing machines do not intake warm or hot water except you have a model which is 40 years+ old. And yes, 40°C is enough if using an appropriate soap. --Scriberius (talk) 17:13, 27 October 2008 (UTC) modified --Scriberius (talk) 18:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

How would the hot water pipe (presumably buried) be insulated? I would expect a lot of lost energy in a long run of pipe, since the garage is not attached. A small tankless electric heater next to the washer with only the cold line sent to the garage seems like the best idea. Even with electric being more expensive per BTU than gas, there would likely be a saving due to not sending hot water through a long pipe. "Warm" or cold water wash is adequate for most things, but for white cotton washcloths or other things which may be hard to get clean and which I wish to sanitize, I still use hot water and chlorine bleach. Edison (talk) 18:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I know that there are grey foam tubes that are used to insulate pipes. I don't know what these are called, but they are often used to insulate hot water pipes. W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 21:59, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd call them "insulating foam tubes" personally. A more technical term would be "foam lagging". --Tango (talk) 17:01, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Truck driver who likes to drive in stocking feet
I am a truck driver who likes to drive in stocking feet; is this legal to do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.147.28.1 (talk) 13:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you tell us what jurisdiction you are driving in? and how this is a language question?  Dismas |(talk) 14:48, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Weird Al Yankovic has a song like that. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:27, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * We can't answer legal questions here anyway. —Angr 19:28, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Who would ever know? The X-ray-equipped fashion police? Clarityfiend (talk) 19:42, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If he gets stopped by the police for something else, and is in his stocking feet when they ask him to step out of the truck, he could get in additional trouble if it turns out to be illegal. At any rate, I'd consider it a bad idea, even if it's not illegal in your jurisdiction. —Angr 20:05, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Me too. The core question has nothing to do with socks, sockings etc.  It's really about whether the driver is wearing footwear or not (e.g. shoes).  I was taught to always wear shoes when driving ( I sometimes ignore this advice), but it was more a question of safety than being illegal per se.  That's in my jurisdiction; the law may be different where you live.  --  JackofOz (talk) 21:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

"a question of safety than being illegal" - why would it be less safe to drive without shoes? I would have thought it would be just as safe unless you're wearing unusually slippery socks. Bare feet can easily grip the pedals, and if you were to wear socks that couldn't grip the pedals and expected to do this often, you could get grips for the pedals. - So I don't really see a safety issue...or am I missing something?

Also if he gets stopped by the police knowing that it is illgal, he could quickly slip on some loose shoes before they even get out of their car or tell him to.W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 23:12, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I've driven with and without shoes, but either way feels safer than with slippers, btw. —Tamfang (talk) 01:53, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it depends on what type of shoes you normally wear. Sometimes, it can be a better idea to take them off and just wear socks. I once knew a Japanese girl who was short even by Japanese standards and she wore platform shoes. She had to take them off to drive.--ChokinBako (talk) 01:26, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

But there is a difference when it comes to women because they wear platforms (as in your picture) and high-heels. They don't drive in these shoes because it wouldn't be practical so they usually take them off in their car and put on driving shoes, that's why a woman driver at a petrol station wearing high-heels won't just get in her car and drive off(after paying), but will take 5 minutes before she pulls away. W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 01:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Moved from language desk. I expect it also depends on what kind of truck you drive, and where.  I'm sure a lot of sites' H&S demands that all visitors wear safety boots (or at least enclosed footwear), even if they never alight from their vehicle. FiggyBee (talk) 14:02, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Wouldn't wearing shoes provide a bit of protection to your feet if you were to have an accident? I guess that would be a pretty odd reason to wear them but I suspect they would provide at least some protection. Personally I used to always drive shoe-less (and I still do if I'm wearing shoes without backs/flip-flops). I doubt there is a law requiring you wear shoes to drive, but you never know. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 14:42, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm, this kind of is a language question - does "stocking feet" mean "bare feet" or "with stockings"? I thought the latter but everyone else seems to think the former. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I would have thought the latter to but it is just easier to answer the question as if it were about driving shoe-less. W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 14:53, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Isn't it typical - when a person asks an unusual question which clearly and obviously contravenes the RD guidelines ( "is this legal" ) everybody and his brother bundles in to answer it with a variety of guesses. Luckily the trucker didn't ask 'is this healthy as well', otherwise we would have had censors out.

Now my guess is that there are few laws that restrict the type of footwear used by the driver of any vehicle but there are probably laws that forbid the use of any clothes or footwear that restrict the ability of the driver to properly and safely control the vehicle. This would be classed as driving without due care and attention or in a more extreme scenario, dangerous driving. (in the UK) But the final judgement would be in court as the driver defended his/her conduct and ability to control the vehicle. Richard Avery (talk) 14:55, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Although there are laws that say what you can't wear whilst driving, this varies from place to place. If this truck driver drives through different countries, I wouldn't suggest he do things that may be illegal in a country he drives through or the country of his destination. W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 15:09, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * See http://tafkac.org/legal/driving.barefoot/driving_barefoot.html --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  16:15, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I happen to know for sure that it's legal to drive without shoes in Texas but that it's illegal in Oklahoma - so for sure it varies from state to state. SteveBaker (talk) 01:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * What's your source for that? The link offered just above your post says it's legal to drive without shoes in Oklahoma and the author claims to have written to the relevant authorities to find out. --Tango (talk) 16:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * It was a cop who pulled my wife over (for speeding) - noticed she had no shoes on and wrote a ticket for that too. This was in Texas - and when I checked the laws and complained to the officer's supervisor, she got off (they waived the speeding ticket also).  The cop said that he'd been working in Oklahoma before he moved to Texas and was unaware that the law here was different.  I guess he could have been wrong when he was in Oklahoma too - but that seems less likely.


 * Cops quite often pull people over for infractions that aren't actually infractions. A friend of mine who was driving a Mini Moke down a Texas freeway - breaking no laws - was pulled over because the cop basically didn't believe the car could possibly be street-legal.  It was - despite having no seatbelts and no windshield wipers - because it was built without seatbelts and the windshield can be folded flat...and it's more than 25 years old which exempts it from a whole bunch of other laws.  The cop checked it over and wrote up a ticket because (he claimed) the car was "too small for Texas roads"...there is no such size restriction - so that ticket got overturned.  SteveBaker (talk) 16:47, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposition 2
I have a voter's guide that I got at the library but it is unclear on one thing. It says under the heading, "The way it is now", that state law makes it illegal to be cruel to animals. For example animal in enclosed areas must have shelter, food, water and room to exersise. People who break these laws my be fined or sent to jail or both.

If there are already laws in place, why is there a Proposition about farm animal cruelty?--76.176.143.54 (talk) 15:15, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You're not clear about the jurisdiction that Prop 2 will affect, which makes it hard to address the question. Perhaps, though, it relates to (presumably expanding) the scope of animal cruelty laws? &mdash; Lomn 15:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm guessing its this proposition. The article explains the proposed legislation's scope. Fribbler (talk) 15:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with the guess; "The way it is now" is a standard formula in California official voting guides (prepared by a neutral authority). —Tamfang (talk) 02:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Amazing that we have to guess. Californians in America behave exactly like Americans in the rest of the world: they assume that you know everything about their lives, laws, politics, history etc. --Lgriot (talk) 04:31, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I would guess that the proposer believes that the current laws in place don't deal with animals' welfare correctly, or aren't strong enough. Also, this proposition is about farm animal cruelty where as the laws already in place just deal with cruelty to animals in general. Maybe it is believed that farm animals experience more cruelty than other animals, and so this proposition is there to revise that section of the laws already in place.W.i.k.i.p.e.d.i.a - Reference desk guy (talk) 15:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

positive Sci Fi
I am a Star Trek fan because it is one of the few shows or books that give a positive futuristic view of human civilization. Another might be the Dune series of books. These are different from say, Escape from New York, Terminator. what other shows or books depict the future of humanity in a positive light? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 15:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Isaac Asimov's books present a complex version of humanity's future. I wouldn't necessarily call them positive or negative, but I would highly recommend them.  Maybe start with the collection I, Robot which introduces his Three Laws of Robotics.  From there, the Elijah Baley series is a good jumping off point.  The Foundation series is also a great read.  Good luck!  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  15:53, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Definitely read Iain Banks' Culture books. Recury (talk) 17:15, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Ender's Game ... the three books in the series that immediately follow it (i.e., not the "Shadow Quartet", which is still kind of a bummer vision of the future, if you ask me) are kind of optimistic. Near-light speed travel, faster-than-light communications, people generally happy.  Although, each race/creed seems to have gotten its own planet à la Star Trek, which always strikes me as being a bit unfortunate...  Dgcopter (talk) 17:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The Culture books aren't set in humanity's future, though, if you're set on that. Algebraist 18:04, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Jack McDevitt's "Engines of God" series, EE "Doc" Smith's (quite old now) Lensman_ series, Peter F. Hamilton's "Pandora's Star", Doug Weller (talk) 19:01, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I seem to recall, from reading a few 15-20 years ago that a college friend loaned me, that Ben Bova tended to predict a generally positive view of the future of humanity. (I read "Voyagers" and a couple others.) He has also higly recommended the Mars Trilogy, which is complex but he said tends to be positive; I have never had the time to read it, however.Somebody or his brother (talk) 19:25, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I loved the scenery of RGB Mars but found the characters dull, the plot incoherent and the economics idiotic. I recommend Robinson's earlier (and shorter) Icehenge, though. —Tamfang (talk) 01:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * hm, never heard of Culture.. will go to the library tomorrow and pick them up :o 71.176.156.86 (talk) 01:49, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Of them, I recommend The Player of Games. —Tamfang (talk) 06:20, 30 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd say you're much less likely to find rampaging monsters in a random sf book than in a random sf movie. — Many of Jack Vance's works are set in a vague period where humans occupy a large mostly-peaceful region of space; the plots tend to be about crime rather than war; though, since it is a large diverse region, some settings are dystopian. — Greg Egan's newest book Incandescence has an appealing setting (I haven't seen it but his website has a story in the same setting). — Ken MacLeod's works might please you. —Tamfang (talk) 01:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I think that in broad strokes it's fair to say that science fiction has separate "optimistic" and "pessimistic" tradations, and that by and large (though certainly not exclusively), the authors who are more left-wing politically write more in the pessimistic one, whereas the libertarians write more in the optimistic one. (There isn't much science fiction written on the anti-libertarian right.) It's certainly not a hard-and-fast rule; Roddenberry as you note wrote generally in the optimistic tradition, whereas Niven's stories set in The State (starting with World out of Time are kind of bleak, but in my observation this is the general tendency.  Of course this could be colored by what one thinks would be a good future -- I wouldn't want things to go the way of The Foundation Trilogy, so I count them as pessimistic, but it's certainly possible that Asimov thought it was something worth hoping for.

Anyway some of the best optimistic SF comes from Heinlein, Niven, and Poul Anderson. --Trovatore (talk) 01:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah yes – Heinlein's optimistic future: a place where dirty old author-avatar men get to have intercourse with young sex-obsessed women (who are sometimes their mothers who they've tracked down through time travel). Aside from the Freudian bits, I suppose that counts as optimistic.... :D TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * See 'Utopia' Avnas Ishtaroth drop me a line  05:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * But then, Avnas, much Utopia literature is about the end of Utopia and its destruction and impossibility. Steewi (talk) 01:12, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd recommend The Dancers at the End of Time by Michael Moorcock for a liberating view on a possible evoluion of humanity. The Time Ships by Stephen Baxter does the trick too. 190.220.104.35 (talk) 16:03, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

The master himself, Robert Heinlein, should not be missed. Stranger in a Strange Land, Time Enough for Love, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, Podkayme of Mars, Farmer in the Sky, and the entire Lazarus Long series are delightful. DOR (HK) (talk) 08:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Engineer who design household items
What type of engineers design household items such as cups, plates and chairs? Material engineers? Acceptable (talk) 23:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I would say that such items are designed by industrial designers, not by any kind of engineer. FiggyBee (talk) 23:59, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed. Engineers are likely to design the factory where such items are made, but designers generally create individual products.  The same relationship exists between chemists and chemical engineers; between architects and civil engineers, etc. etc.  An engineer's main job is to take the designs of others and make them realized in a practical manner.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  12:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * ...or game designers and software engineers/artists...yes - there is almost always a job-title split between those who design and those who arrange for production and those who actually do the producing. However, in many small organizations, the same person may bear multiple job titles - so it's actually not that uncommon for the designer and the engineer to be one and the same person...especially when what drives the design is a technical matter rather than an artistic/aesthetic matter. SteveBaker (talk) 12:40, 28 October 2008 (UTC)