Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.
I have a bad habit of repeating things I have already said during conversations. I do not seem to remember what I had told them prior. How can I stop this habit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.213.180 (talk) 04:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If it's a memory issue, consider seeing a doctor. If it's just an issue of not paying enough attention, just try to focus. Falconusptc 12:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See our article on concentration, it might have some help on how to concentrate. Perhaps speak more slowly, to allow yourself to think of what you're saying. You can also google "memory games" for help, to see just how your memory is; since we don't know what the context is, as far as what things you're not remembering, and how long ago you forget, we really can't say whether it's normal or not to forget. For all we know, you could talk to the same personf or 2 hours, in which case it's very hard to remember everything. :-)209.244.187.155 (talk) 23:26, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am happy to say getting old has not affected my short term memory nor has it affected my short term memory. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Advantages of streetcars over buses in Toronto[edit]
Our article on the Toronto streetcar system says citizens' groups "succeeded in persuading the TTC of the advantages of streetcars over buses on heavily traveled main routes" in 1972.
What were those advantages? The only advantages I know of streetcars is 1) They can go off the street onto unique rights-of-way for a partially light-rail system; 2) They can run down narrow corridors and 3) They produce less in emissions.
But Toronto did not have any light-rail in 1972 (and still has very little); Toronto does not have narrow streets like some European city centers; and emissions were not that big of an issue in 1972.
On the other hand, the disadvantages of keeping a streetcar system seem obvious -- the cost to maintain more than 100 miles of track, several garages and a whole separate division to service the vehicles, and the inflexibility of streetcar vs. bus lines.
So what were the arguments that convinced Toronto to keep its streetcars in the early 70s? Now that urban rail is so popular again in North America, it may seem like a farsighted decision, but what was the rationale back then? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 05:16, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about Toronto, but one of the main advantages of streetcars in general – as hinted at in the quotation you give – is that they are much better than buses in heavy traffic, i.e. they don't get caught up in traffic jams. --Richardrjtalk email 05:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They sure do when they don't have their own isolated right-of-way, which is the case on most of the Toronto system. I believe the main advantages are considered to be that (1) they carry more passengers per vehicle and (2) they don't have to change lanes back and forth every time they make a stop, which allows traffic to interfere with buses. --Anonymous, 06:01 UTC, November 23, 2009.
Besides producing less emmissions, they also consume lest fuel, and for a large city public transportation system, even small reductions in fuel spending can result in large savings in terms of total dollars. While in 1972, most cities weren't thinking as much about polution and global warming and that sort of stuff as today, the reduction in fuel consumption could have meant a significant factor in making that decision. --Jayron32 06:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The OP lists the "inflexibility" of street cars as a disadvantage but many people consider this its major advantage. Laying streetcar tracks signals a major commitment to a particular route that can be a catalyst for economic development. Builders are reluctant to make major, long-term investments based on a bus route because those routes so frequently change. —D. Monacktalk 10:07, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Another advantage is that they use a signalling system, which makes it easier to keep frequent services well spaced. Warofdreamstalk 10:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Jayron hit the nail on the head. They are less polluting because they are electric (or at least the pollution isn't produced in the centre of the city, where eveybody breathes it in, but in a power plant); more efficient (electric again, although you can get electric buses also); carrying more passengers per vehicle, which cuts down on traffic and makes them more efficient (again). DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:50, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see the obviousness of maintaining a streetcar system being more expensive than maintaining a fleet of busses. Installing tracks and overhead wires is a one time investment while busses continually wear down their tyres and engine parts. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Streetcars continually wear down their tyres and motor parts, too. Of course, the difference between busses and rail is that generally a rail operator picks up all the infrastructure costs, whereas bus operators' roads are provided by the taxpayer. FiggyBee (talk) 17:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's a bit of a shell game; in North America, transit companies are all public agencies that usually get most of their budget from taxes and intergovernmental transfers. Roads are usually paid for by general-purpose governments such as states and municipalities, but some of that is reimbursed through gasoline taxes set aside for road improvement. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:36, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The website The Transport Politic has been covering this debate, and provides good explanation of the theoretical and practical arguments for each side. --M@rēino 21:42, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
what are online data sources and their usage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manish6007 (talk • contribs) 05:38, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could you expand your question a bit? Online data sources are places on the internet where you can find information. The can be used by people who have need for information. The question is way to vague to provide a better answer than that... --Jayron32 05:52, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ya thats what i want help regarding various online data sources..and their diff diff usage in diff fields —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manish6007 (talk • contribs) 06:09, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Reference Desk has a policy of not doing your homework for you. I'd suggest asking your teacher for a couple of examples to get you started. Vimescarrot (talk) 11:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just consider various online data sources. A neat one is the Public Library of Science. Their mission is to make "…the world's scientific and medical literature a freely available public resource." There are countless others. I think if you start typing a few general search terms into Google, you should turn up a few more. Bus stop (talk) 15:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is an example of an on-line data source. It is read and edited by humans. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 17:22, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In truth, almost all web sites are online data sources. My home page has data (mostly about me) - and it's online. I think you are being asked something much more specific. You need to ask for qualification. SteveBaker (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is Steinbaugh a Jewish name14:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[edit]
Is Steinbaugh a Jewish name and where does it originate from? Looking on some geneology information on this name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnalee1950 (talk • contribs) 14:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How so? Stein is German for "stone". Bach is German for "stream". There's nothing inherently Jewish or Yiddish about the words or the name (none of the Steinbachs in the English Wikipedia are listed as being Jewish, as far as I can see). FiggyBee (talk) 16:26, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are electric shavers less painful or atleast quicker?[edit]
I absolutely hate shaving my face due to the slight pain it causes and it also consumes about 15 minutes.
My skin is quite sensitive and sensitive foams or gels does not help either. Iam left with warm water to soften hair
and i use the famous razor that most guy use and iam happy with that.
It is still painful since i dont use foam or a gel.I am thinking about trying electric shavers. i dont care about how clean the
shave is, if my pain is reduced and it s quick, i would be relieved. Please say, can electric shaver be of any help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.220.192.46 (talk) 15:24, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, you're a little unclear. Do you mean you have a reaction to shaving foams and so can't use them? In my experience, wet shaving with foam and a sharp, multi-bladed razor is the least uncomfortable way of shaving. I find electric shavers uncomfortable, but nowhere near as bad as trying to wet shave with water alone. A beard trimmer (like a mini hair clipper) is comfortable, but won't shave closer than stubble, and won't work well if you want to shave more than once a week. People's mileage with shaving varies greatly, so your best option may be to simply try an electric shaver and see how it works for you. Try a specialist shaver shop if you want advice and the possibility of returning it if it doesn't work out. FiggyBee (talk) 15:36, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Have you tried talking to your doctor? There might be suitable soaps/foams/gels available on prescription that would work for you even if standard sensitive products don't work. My experience with electric shavers isn't good, but that was with a really cheap one - I found it didn't get a close shave and it was quite painful since it seems to rip hairs out as much as it cut them. More expensive shavers are probably better. --Tango (talk) 16:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I used a very high-end electric shaver once and was surprised at how easy and relatively painless it was. One of those expensive deals with the three revolving circles and all that. That being said, low- and even mid-range ones are entirely the opposite experience. This is just anecdotal of course. I too would look into better gels/foams—I find shaving with water to be MUCH harder than with a foam of some sort. --Mr.98 (talk) 16:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oscillating battery powered razor Wikipedia discusses electric shavers but calls them electric razors. The brand with 3 revolving circles is Philips. I have used foil shavers from Remington and Braun and both were satisfactory. For happy shaving use only light pressure and keep the cutter and foil clean. The Braun battery shaver can be washed in running water or in an optional storing bath. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 17:18, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My Remington shaver has three circles. One advantage of electric shavers is that you don't necessarily need to be in a specific place (like a bathroom) to do it. Somehow, the two shavers I've had both catch the hair immediately when shaved, and none falls out (always been a mystery to me). I normally shave while watching TV in my bedroom. Vimescarrot (talk) 19:42, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you're allergic to something in the shaving creams/gels, consider the old-fashion shaving soap and shave brush. It gives lather and lubrication without all the extra compounds from shaving creams. Don't worry, you don't need to use a cut-throat razor, it works perfectly well with modern (multi-bladed) safety razors. -- 128.104.112.237 (talk) 21:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's possible to hurt yourself with an electric shaver but it's really not a constant worry. Vranak (talk) 18:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is a difference between cutting yourself shaving (which should be a very rare experience with an electric shaver) and it just being slightly painful/leaving you sore. At least with cheap electric shavers, the latter is more than possible. --Tango (talk) 19:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Try wet-shaving after a bath or shower when your stubble will be soft. 84.13.162.136 (talk) 20:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've never had a good experience with electrics, though they were admittedly not the highest quality. The problem with most gels and foams is that if they work to soften the stubble they will also work to soften the skin - at least in my experience. I have very sensitive skin and found the best solution was to shave in the shower. While I now have a beard, I still shave under the neck, etc. in a hot shower. If you find that just too weird (it takes some practice to shave without a mirror), my next preferred option was to use hot-hot-hot wash-cloths to soften the stubble first and as I shave and then a hot shower afterwards. It would seem logical for a hot shower to further irritate the skin, but it was not so, at least for me. Matt Deres (talk) 21:28, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, the advantage of electrics is comfort and speed. It's a lot harder to nick your face up with an electric. The advantage of regular razors is a closer shave. If you're a young teenager, it might be best to go with an electric, which is what I used until college. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:38, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I had the same problem - electric razors didn't help - gazillion-blade razors...worse - cut-throat razors (they aren't called that for nothing you know!). After 30 years of hassle - I decided to grow a beard - best decision I ever made. I can trim it about once every couple of weeks - and it's completely painless. You can either use a beard trimmer or (with a little practice) scissors. If you've never tried it - give it a whirl - it only takes a few weeks to find out and if you don't like it - it's gone in 10 minutes flat! SteveBaker (talk) 01:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'd second that. Don't worry about how itchy and uncomfortable it is for the first few weeks, either; it really does go away. Also, and I'm sure this has never influenced a young man at any time, women dig facial hair. And don't let 'em tell you they don't, cause they do - as most men usually find out immediately after shaving off a month-long growth. "What? You shaved it off? I was just getting used to it!" Matt Deres (talk) 02:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
:::If you want to know what women like, the most reliable way is to ask them. You will probably find that their preferences vary. ;-)Itsmejudith (talk) 12:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've been painlessly dry-shaving my non-bearded & moustached portions with the same cheap two-head Phillishave shaver for over 30 years - the oscillating beard trimmer has gone blunt, but the main rotary heads are still fine. A useful way to minimise discomfort is to ensure your facial skin is absolutely dry and to dust it with talcum powder, which provides dry lubrication. A dry disposable safety razor can be used for those few elusive bristles that lie the wrong way so that the shaver won't pick them up. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 11:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
are you really using the same shaver with blades for 30 years?. if that is the case i should buy philishave. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.220.95.28 (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, really. If it had ever become difficult to use I'd have bought a replacement shaver, but it never has. Years ago, not all products were made with the built-in obsolescence now ubiquitous: for example, I'm also still using a Hoover Constellation vacuum cleaner, once my mother's, that's almost as old as I am, i.e. around 50 or so. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 21:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, electric shavers are just as if not more "painful." If this bothers you that much, try shaving after a shower, and if you don't want to do that, use a washcloth with hot water to warm your face for a few minutes before shaving. You'll be amazed at the difference. Shadowjams (talk) 12:13, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone tell me how I can download music onto my flashdrive? Post it on my talk page. B-Machine (talk) 16:09, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Questions are always answered here, that way we can share the answers with everyone. There are a wide variety of ways to download music (some legal, some not - we won't give you advice on the latter!). How do you intend to listen to the music? That might impact on which method is best. --Tango (talk) 16:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I intend to use it for personal use. You know, listen to it on my computer. B-Machine (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This Google search reports more free music download sites than you are likely to need. A popular format for music is an MP3 file. WARNING Never download anything from websites without having a freshly updated virus checker on your computer. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 17:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What if you needed to download an update to your virus checker...? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 05:01, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Virus checkers usually have an Update function that manually or automatically connects to the checker supplier.Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:56, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am not aware of any exploits in MP3. If anyone knows of any, do please share. --Trovatore (talk) 09:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No but you do get the files with names like
"The Ref Deskers - Science Desk Blues.mp3 .exe"
Which may appear to be an mp3 on casual inspection, but is obviously a trap. (Too bad to.) APL (talk) 19:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This person may simply be asking how to copy mp3 files from their PC (iTunes?) to their flash drive. If that's the case it's you simply use the My Computer interface to drag and drop the files. I can't vouch for them but there are some instructions for "iTunes" here. APL (talk) 19:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whenever I go to my local buffet restaurant I have a sneezing fit shortly after finishing my meal. I sneeze 15-20 times within a span of three minutes, often quite loud and messy. When I am finished I am fine and do not sneeze again for the rest of the day. This mainly occurs at a particular chain restaurant ... I seem to be OK when eating at other places. Furthermore, this phenomenon never occurs at home, and never during the meal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.60.31.103 (talk) 16:38, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Have you read the article Sneeze? Airborne particles such as dust or pollen can trigger the Allergyrhinitis which is signalled by sneezing.Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:58, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It stands to reason that sneezing serves first, last, and perhaps always to expel something unwanted from the nasal passages. Since those are connected to your mouth, perhaps there are some gases or other particles emanating from the food you are eating. Are some of the dishes spicy, or well-seasoned, or particularly flavorful? Vranak (talk) 19:58, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you always finish your meal with the same dish? It may be that this is the problem. Prokhorovka (talk) 20:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You could do an experiment where you go to the place for a while and do not eat anything. That could help you differentiate whether it is something that you eat or something else. Googlemeister (talk) 20:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This Christmas, my roommate and I want to drive from NY to see the Grand Canyon but someone told me that it will be closed? If so, couldn't I see it anyway? Does anyone have any suggestions which route to go? Also, what are the things we defintely need to bring with us on this car trip? I'm so excited!--Reticuli88 (talk) 16:56, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You can see the Grand Canyon any time of year. Your someone may have been confused by the fact that visitor and park ranger services are closed on the north side of the canyon during the winter (because they get too few visitors; the vast majority of visitors start from Tusayan, Arizona and Grand Canyon Village, Arizona on the south rim). FiggyBee (talk) 17:18, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To get to Tusayan from I-40 you'll cross the Coconino Plateau which is pretty high (over 7000 ft) and which can get rather snowy (so either a 4-wheel-drive car or snowchains are advisable, although you probably won't need them). Given that you've come so far, both Monument Valley and Canyon de Chelly National Monument are within striking distance. Personally I found the canyon rather underwhelming, but I was awestruck by Death Valley in winter (it's pleasant during the day, below freezing at night); it's a full day's drive further west (Beatty, Nevada is a decent place to stay when visiting Death Valley, particularly if you're on a budget), but Las Vegas is on the way. In the high desert (Flagstaff, Coconino, Tusayan) you'll find it sufficiently cold that you'll be wearing your NY clothes. Bring ample batteries and memory cards for your camera, as you'll find no shortage of things to photograph but a distinct shortage of stores to buy such (there's a store in GC Village, but it's expensive). If you go to Monument Valley, remember that no alcohol is sold in the Navajo Nation (and the NN is half the size of New York State). -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 03:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The North Rim is closed from October on, but the South Rim (which has more facilities and is lower in elevation) is open all year. It'll be cold at the rim although if you descend (i.e., walk 4000 feet vertically) to the level of the river, it'll be quite warm at the bottom. From St. Louis onwards the road parallels old US 66, and if you get off the interstate you'll see lots of evidence of the old road. It's about the closest thing the US has to ancient ruins - abandoned motor courts, dying towns and such. The Grapes of Wrath will seem much more relevant there than it did in high school. Acroterion(talk) 04:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A little off-topic, but "it's about the closest thing the US has to ancient ruins" is very inaccurate and a little offensive. Indeed, ruins left by the Ancient Pueblo Peoples abound in and around the Grand Canyon itself. FiggyBee (talk) 00:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I want to emphasise "it'll be cold". I once flew to a conference in Phoenix, where it was 40 degrees C (100F) so I packed only my business suit and shorts and T-shirt. Afterwards I drove to the Grand Canyon. Nobody told me it was a mile higher, and I ended up wearing almost every piece of clothing I brought with me. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:39, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While amazing any month of the year, the Grand Canyon is particularly awe-inspiring in winter, although as mentioned above, the North Rim is closed. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 05:08, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One point on the "if you descend" bit: the upper levels of the trail are likely to be covered with ice, possibly with a layer of snow hiding the ice. --Carnildo (talk) 22:46, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Google Maps suggested 2 routes:
I-78, I-76, I-70, I-44, I-40 Distance: 2,400 miles (note that stretches of I-40 are above 6,500 ft and could be affected by snow/ice)
I-78, I-81, I-40, I-30, I-20, I-10, I-17 Distance: 2,800 miles (longer and more southerly, but might avoid the snow for longer)
Note that driving those kind of distances can be difficult. Even if you drive for 10 hours per day (doing 2 spells of 2.5 hours each), it will still take you 4 days to get there and you'll be very tired when you arrive. I doubt you would be prepared to keep up that gruelling schedule for long. Then there's the cost of gas (perhaps $800+) and motel rooms to consider. You will find it easier and quicker to fly to Phoenix, AZ and rent a car for a few days; and it could be cheaper depending on the days you fly (I know christmas is a bad time for cheap flights). Astronaut (talk) 04:09, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Disarming the factory alarm system on a 1997 Jeep Grand Cherokee[edit]
How do you disable it BY YOURSELF?
We bought it used and it didn't come with the remote and we can't afford to send it to the dealers because they will charge us an arm and a leg. --Reticuli88 (talk) 17:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have an answer for you, but there is a specialist Jeep Grand Cherokee forum here that appears to have plenty of traffic from owners and enthusiasts. If you ask your question there, somebody may be able to help. Good luck. Karenjc 17:32, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What is the method to calculate quickly in your head instead of using a calculator?[edit]
How do those seemingly mental math geniuses do it? Are their brains really programmed differently, allowing them to do what seems to be mental magic? What gives here? Maybe they have integrated circuits instead of dendrites? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spranykot (talk • contribs) 19:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are many shortcuts for doing various things, like "to multiply a number by nine, just append a zero and then subtract the number". You can learn a bunch of them and do quick math in your head for a variety of situations. Here is one of the many books on the topic. --Sean 20:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of it has to do with learning shortcuts such as that mentioned above. Googlemeister (talk) 20:45, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, nearly always normal (or intelligent) brains working efficiently, though you might be interested in reading about Savant syndrome. Dbfirs 20:58, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's a guy, Scott Flansburg, known as "the human calculator" who used to turn up on Carson and apparently still makes the talk show rounds. He's a normal guy (not a savant) who has catalogued a number of tricks and is a whiz at doing what the OP would like to do. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 21:06, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many years ago I was invited to a "student" party where much alcohol was being consumed and music was blaring loudly from the stereo system. One of the guys was a computer programmer in the early days of business systems computer operations. Someone asked him to do his party trick which he pleaded not to have to do. But he was pressed into doing it. He lay on his back on the floor and asked 5 people at random to each give him a number from 0 to 9 which formed the first of 2 five digit numbers. He then asked for another set of 5 digits from another random 5 people to form the second 5 digit number. He then asked to be ignored while we all got on with the party. He closed his eyes abd began multiplying the two 5 digit numbers together. A few of us did the calculation on paper without discussing the results with anyone else and watched over him to make sure there was no trickery. About 30 minutes later, he shouted out the answer which we wrote down as he spoke. His answer was exactly the same as those we had calculated on paper. He then got to his feet, breathed very deeply, and got extremely drunk. Amazing. 92.22.171.217 (talk) 21:36, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Even drunk, 30 minutes sounds pretty slow to me. It is impressive to be able to do it at all, but if you can do it I wouldn't expect it to take that long. I'm not sure I've ever tried multiplying two 5-digit numbers together in my head, but I reckon I could do it faster than that. The difficult bit for that problem isn't knowing lots of tricks (unless you get lucky and there is a trick for that particular pair of numbers), it's remembering all the numbers as you go along (since you will have to do long multiplication, there's no way around it). I have a very visual memory, so I write them on a mental black-board, but you should use whatever works for you. --Tango (talk) 00:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tango you just made boast that you could perform some mental feat in under 30 seconds, but then you admit that you've never tried it? Wouldn't your comment have been much better informed if you'd taken the mere 30 seconds to try it? APL (talk) 07:16, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am by no means a math genius, but I can usually do basic arithmetic in my head, often faster than a calculator. The trick is to break a number into easy to work with parts, and then keep track of remainders. Generally I round one of the numbers to the nearest convenient multiple of 10 or 5, and then keep track of how much extra I need to add or subtract to the answer to compensate for my approximation. Its just a matter of practice. Eventually, you figure out instintively which tricks to use. --Jayron32 21:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One additon trick I recall from Flansburg is "left hand addition". That is, add the high-order columns in your head first, and go left to right, as it's easier to keep track of. That's opposite from the method taught in school, but there you've got paper to write on. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 02:14, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As mentioned above, it's a combination of practice, technique, and natural aptitude. You can train in the first two - I have a fair amount of natural aptitude at this sort of thing (other kids used to race me against pocket calculators at high school), and it's easy to find ways to practice (on long car journeys, if I'm bored I try factorising car number plates in my head -usually pretty simple since where I live they're all three- or four-digit numbers). As to technique, there are huge numbers of shortcuts (the 37/27 method and 7/11/13 method help with factorising, for instance (7x11x13=1001, so 37744 must be a multiple of 7 (37744-37037=707, which is a multiple of 77). Similar tricks are possible with a lot of different numbers and problems (multiplying 77*83? It's 80 squared minus 9). But -as always - if you're going to learn the tricks of the trade, the best thing to do is to learn the trade first (by practicing). As to natural aptitude, that is a harder one, and some people are just luckyy. I have slight synaesthesia - I hear maths as music (something I share with Richard Feynman, though my intellect to his is like a sand dune compared to Everest). FWIW, I tried multiplying two random 5-digit numbers together a couple of minutes ago as per above. Took just under four minutes. There are tricks :) Grutness...wha? 23:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please explain more about this: "As to technique, there are huge numbers of shortcuts (the 37/27 method and 7/11/13 method help with factorising, for instance (7x11x13=1001, so 37744 must be a multiple of 7 (37744-37037=707, which is a multiple of 77)." Why would the factors of 999 and 1001 be of general use? And what is the significance of 37037? 92.24.170.160 (talk) 20:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
37037, like any number that is XY0XY, has to be a multiple of 1001 - in this instance it's simply an example to show working. As such, if you want to know whether a large number is a factor of 7, 11, or 13, one way of doing it (the easiest way for 7 and 13) is to remove as many multiples of 1001 as possible and then factorise the remainder. For instance:
Is 10725741 a multiple of 13?
Take out 10015005 (clearly a multiple of 1001) and you get 710736
Take 710710 (clearly a multiple of 1001) and you get 26
26 is 13*2, therefore 10725741 is a multiple of 13
Daniel Tammet is a rare example of a savant who is not otherwise crippled by other mental conditions and is able to describe much of what he can do. He has a kind of 'mathematical synaesthesia' where numbers seem to him to have shape, color and texture. Oddly, he directly perceives prime numbers as being particularly 'smooth' so that he doesn't have to consciously try to factor a number to see if it's prime - it just "feels right". In a documentary about this remarkable guy, he made clay models of the numbers as he sees them - and some properties of the shapes give him 'instant' short-cuts in many calculations. He has mental pictures for almost every number up to 10,000 or so. It seems that having an intimate familiarity with numbers really helps these people. If you've learned all sorts of odd facts about particular numbers - you can use those facts to make very close guesses to answers to tough problems that you only have to correct in the last few decimal places. Richard Feynman taught himself quite a few of those party tricks - and despite not being a savant by any stretch of the imagination - was still able to do incredibly difficult calculations in his head just by being familiar with enough 'points on the landscape'. Knowing things like all of the primes, squares, cubes, triangle numbers, factorials up to some large limit really gives you a head start on some of the more tricky problems. Some of Feynman's tricks involved using series solutions that he could refine - so an initial "guess" might give him the first few digits of a solution - and while he was speaking those digits, he'd be mentally calculating a couple more - so it would appear that he got the entire answer right very quickly, when in fact, he was still calculating more digits of precision as he was reciting the results. For some classes of calculations (like extracting square and cube roots) - this made him seem much faster than he really was. For people who aren't savants - it truly is just a matter of learning a lot of little tricks - and then putting them together in the right way - and lots and lots of practice. SteveBaker (talk) 00:41, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to read the Isaac Asimov story The Feeling of Power. Hint: Don't read our article first. The story is short, and there's a link to the full text on the bottom of our article. Bunthorne (talk) 03:37, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely not one of Asimov's better short stories. When computers cost a million dollars and filled a room - the story maybe meant something - but now you can get a pretty capable computer for $5 that'll fit comfortably into a matchbox...the story seems rather lame. Asimov's stories show clearly that he imagined computers getting much smarter - but not getting a whole lot smaller or cheaper. In reality, computers have shrunk spectacularly in size and cost - but they really aren't any smarter than they ever were. SteveBaker (talk) 04:21, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the link to the full text version for reasons discussed on the talk page Nil Einne (talk) 09:01, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What's that very very bright star appearing right up close to the moon tonight? --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 19:16, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A fortnight ago it was Venus [1]. It's too cloudy tonight for me to look to see if it is still there. Where do you live? Dbfirs 19:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Where you are viewing from won't make any difference to the relative positions of celestial objects (at least not to the naked eye). --Tango (talk) 19:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! Cheers, Tango! And thanks for the link! I've always wondered what Jupiter was :) --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 20:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
... and apologies for the wrong guess. I found this link later [2], but Tango beat me to it. Dbfirs 20:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why I linked that... force of habit, I guess! --Tango (talk) 22:00, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers! And it would appear that this question is being asked by someone else on the Science desk, so let's tie this one up and any more answers can be placed on the other desk. Thanks both of you! --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 21:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
if you're interested in viewing the night sky, two useful pieces of software (at least one of which I'm pretty sure is available as freeware, in demo form at least) are Starry Night and Stellarium. It should be fairly easy to find copies via google. Grutness...wha? 00:31, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does Dell.com typically have large online reductions on their laptops on Black Friday? Acceptable (talk) 20:29, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you'd like to hang on a few days, we can give you a definitive answer. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:33, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They have done every other year, so I would imagine so. But the scale of the savings in previous years were modest. Fribbler (talk) 15:37, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is this answering your question? No, But I lay all of your trust on a random person on the internet into my statement that you should not buy a dell. You get what you pay for, in terms of quality+service. If you want a good computer, go hp/toshiba/gateway, if you want a cheaper one, buy one that isn't dell from tigerdirect.com or newegg.com. Chris M. (talk) 19:07, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Citation needed?!! ;-) Gazhiley (talk) 13:10, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not like mr dell needs me anyone to shill for him but I work in in the IT department of an organisation with 30000+ employees and we use Dell computers as standard. Of course organisational requirements are going to be quite different to individual requirements, but i don't agree with the above. Our computers get heavily used and abused and I do not think there is a big quality difference between dell and HP/ toshiba / gateway. Well I don't really have experince with gateway, but I'd be surprised if it was way ahead of the rest. I've recommended Dell as personal computers to several of my friends and have never regretted it. I'm not saying don't shop around but if the dell fits your requirements and price then I don't believe Dell are a "cheap" alternative. Vespine (talk) 22:17, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually Chris both HP and Gateway have higher failure rates than Dell according to this. --antilivedT | C | G 00:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
General statistics vs. Personal experience. I obviously have no reason to disagree with you, but I've also dealth with HP support and Dell support and the latter was far FAR inferior. Also, I've found it often difficult and expensive to replace parts on Dell computers, for example, I've seen a few cases of power supplies that failed just over a year in (after warranty expired) and the power supply wasn't available anywhere, even directly from Dell. Support said they stopped making it and there weren't any other power supplies that would work in that model. So while it's not impossible they fail less frequently, I'd wager that the cost (in mental anguish and dollars) to own a Dell is higher then HP/Gateway. :) Chris M. (talk) 14:19, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally - if you happen to work for a company that buys a lot of Dell stuff - it's worth asking your IT people whether there is an option for employees to buy computers from Dell at corporate rates. I did that when I wanted to buy a bunch of cheap LCD monitors - and when our IT guy enquired, it turned out that Dell would give employees of companies with corporate accounts a 15% discount and access to a set of special one-off barguins that the general public can't usually get. SteveBaker (talk) 00:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
