Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Conversation >

Random Q and A Thread

Page: 1 ... 31 32 33 34 35(36)37 38 39 40 41... 42

14:11 / 17.02.04

I believe the Windows startup sound actually counts as a very short musical composition (possibly the shortest ever commissioned). It's by Brian Eno, I think.

18:01 / 17.02.04

Grant - in Umberto Eco's "Baudolino" there's a great little bit about the Magi, and their origins, as well as their many names. The three names you mention that have stuck - if I remember correctly are of Persian origin as these wisemen were Zoroastrians.

I'd heard the Persian/Zoroastrian thing before, yeah. But the specific Persian names... where do they come from? What's "Baudolino" published in?

Ex

18:16 / 17.02.04

gingerbop - I have also seen people lose hair (permenantly) from pulling. Two months of overtight wool extensions and my friend's hairline crept up several feet, giving him an oddly saurian look.
I'm not sure if this is a situation of similar intensity to your own. Or indeed if the boy was lying and he's always been a big lizard-headed Mekon.

unheimlich manoeuvre

13:44 / 18.02.04

grant
they seem to be Parsi priests but they could be called Bithisarea, Melichior, and Gathaspa.

Who Were the Magi?
Most of what we associate with the "Magi" is from early church traditions. Most have assumed there were three of them, since they brought three specific gifts (but the Biblical text doesn't number them). They are called "Magi" from the Latinized form of the Greek word magoi, transliterated from the Persian, for a select sect of priests. (Our word "magic" comes from the same root.)
As the years passed, the traditions became increasingly embellished. By the 3rd century they were viewed as kings. By the 6th century they had names: Bithisarea, Melichior, and Gathaspa. Some even associated them with Shem, Ham and Japheth--the three sons of Noah--and thus with Asia, Africa, and Europe. A 141h century Armenian tradition identifies them as Balthasar, King of Arabia; Melchior, King of Persia; and Gasper, King of India.

or Re: Balthasar,Melchior, and Casper

WHO THE MAGI WERE
We may form a conjecture by non-Biblical evidence of a probable meaning to the word magoi. Herodotus (Histories I, ci) is our authority for supposing that the Magi were the sacred caste of the Medes.

16:27 / 18.02.04

You've made an old man very, very happy.

I've also stuck Baudolino on my Amazon wishlist, once I figured out it was a novel and not an essay.

10:49 / 19.02.04

Probably a mock-worthy question, but...

How much tobacco is exhaled by someone smoking? None at all?
If there is some, would it be enough to cause a low-degree addiction in a secondhand smoker after long periods of exposure to smoke?

I'm an ignorant, yes, but please... don't... hit... me

11:12 / 19.02.04

I don't have hard data to hand , but according to research laid out in The Tipping Point, it's estimated that a person needs to ingest between 4 and 6 mg of nicotine every day in order to become addicted. This is equivalent to smoking about 5 cigarettes a day. Now, the percentage of the nicotine absorbed by the smoker aside (I think this varies significantly depending on the smoker’s ‘style’), given the enormous diffusion and dilution of 'environmental' smoke (compared with sticking the thing in your mouth and repeatedly sucking the stuff directly into your lungs) I can only imagine that it would be impossible to breathe in that amount from even the smokiest of environments.
However, 'addiction' is a slippery term, and as far as I can tell, defined in terms of a person's relationship with something rather than the thing itself. So if you find yourself increasingly craving very smoky air, to the point where you pursue such environments compulsively and to your detriment, it might be fair to consider yourself addicted.

11:00 / 20.02.04

Someone in my office said that only one species of frog "ribbits" but that it's native to Hollywood. So everyone sees films and thinks that the sound frogs in general make is the sound that this one specific Hollywood frog makes.

Sounds like bull to me, but snopes is not helping me today. Can anyone confirm or deny?

14:58 / 20.02.04

I haven't a clue Jub, but your question reminded me of The Quack Project, one of my favourite things on the internet.

15:03 / 20.02.04

I think this factoid was featured on the never-popular panel based quiz show Q.I.. And a bit of googling suggests this might well be true.
Apparently it's the Pacific Treefrog, native to California, that has that characteristic ribbit call. But whether various other species sound very similar to the untrained ear, I'm not sure. I don't know, for instance, that I'd know a ribbit from a rebbit; but that might make me figure of fun amongst herpetologists.

20:50 / 20.02.04

I'm currently working on a pet project for me and a friend - writing, stealing and generally cobbling together the bits for a mini-encyclopedia of vaguely academic stuff that either we're either interested in or will find useful. It's currently in the form of a wiki, to be found here. The problem is that Swiki.net is probably the most infuriatingly unreliable site on the internet, and is down far more than it actually works. I suppose I can't complain as it's free and everything but obviously it's not ideal and often means I can't access or update the material when I need to.

I don't really have any money to spend, which would enable me to use a proffesional site. So, does anyone know any personal wiki sites that are both free and reliable? Failing that, there is the less attractive option of using offline databases to organise everything. The problem is that Access only lets you put 255 characters into any entry, so it's useless for my purposes. So, does anyone know any database-esque programs that might be of use to me?

Thanks.

01:16 / 22.02.04

will

If it's true that no question is too stupid, I have one. Is "grant" the Grant?

love

01:38 / 22.02.04

Nope.

13:12 / 22.02.04

Or so he makes out, anyway. But I have my suspicions. Those sideburns are stick-ons.

03:02 / 23.02.04

My Internet Explorer has been killed. Almost every page I try and visit now gets redirected to another site with a 'sorry! the page you requested...'. Ad-Aware doesn't seem to be stopping whatever it is from doing this. Can anyone reccomend a good program to clean this up?

03:22 / 23.02.04

...and I just found out that my virus scanner was a trial-only, and expired over a year ago! Can anyone reccomend a good, free virus protection program?

06:21 / 23.02.04

AVG is a good antivirus, click here and scroll to the bottom, also i'd recommend spybot, both of these are freeware too.

11:17 / 23.02.04

- Just looked if there was a similar thread in the music forum but doesn't look like it.

Aaanyway - was watching a programme last night (Sunday) on Channel 4 about the 50 artists with the biggest selling singles. It was on for about 3 or 4 hours and I fell asleep right at the end - so don't know who one. I'm guessing the Beatles but it's driving me mad. If anyone saw it - please let me know who won!

(and thanks SW for the froggy stuff)

11:27 / 23.02.04

Channel 4's 100 best-selling singles list.

Better get yer sick bag out.

11:29 / 23.02.04

Biggest-selling artist, if that was what you were after, is halfway down the page.

12:29 / 23.02.04

Two questions:

1. What is the precise difference between an archetype and a stereotype? For instance, when a newspaper columnist makes the obligatory mention of a "working class mother screaming at her children in the supermarket," is ze referring to an archetype or a stereotype? (Would I be correct to say refer even? Should I say instead that the columnist is using a 'type?)

2. I'm after examples in fiction (any media) of the archetypal/stereotypical "ineffectual, pampered, ivory-tower-dwelling, sneery intellectual", or any similarly negative depictions of thinking types, scientists, artists, radicals, liberals, geeks etc. Can anybody think of any? The less obscure, the better. All I can think of so far are:

- Dr Strangelove
- the 'too tasty for geeks' ad for Shreddies
- the beret wearing communist boyfriend of a character in a John Landis film whose name escapes me

Any more?

16:53 / 23.02.04

1. "Archetype" is a psychological term from Jung -- it refers to a complex (a component of the personality, like "ego") common to all human beings, generally with some sort of mythic feel to it. The myth part is the key -- makes it universal, instantly recognizable. Wicked Stepmother. Trickster.
A "stereotype" is just a shorthand/heuristic kinda summation used to categorize a person. Or action or situation.
There's a kind of overlap when a stereotype becomes kind of universal (or universal enough for a columnist's readership).

2. The effete snob seems like a close cousin to the sneery intellectual. The sitcoms "Frasier" and "The Odd Couple" would contain examples of that stereotype. I want to say 50s horror movies, but I'm can't think of any -- I prefer the ones with the professor-as-hero.

17:21 / 23.02.04

And, not sure how mainstream this is, but bascially the entire Welch family in Lucky Jim is a dig at various intellectual types. When I saw your question, I was sure I could think of loads, but that's all I've come up with so far...

17:33 / 23.02.04

I feel like Vincennes, I'm sure there's loads but suddenly all I can think of is Beaker from the Muppets.

Which is worrying.

unheimlich manoeuvre

23:23 / 23.02.04

"ineffectual, pampered, ivory-tower-dwelling, sneery intellectual"
I think you're looking for The History Man by Malcolm Bradbury.

13:45 / 24.02.04

I suppose Don Quixote and whatsishead from Confederacy of Dunces would both be related, too, although not precisely the same.

14:50 / 24.02.04

Thanks again, you lot, good stuff (keep it coming, please). Coinky doinkily, I found Don Quixote at a car boot sale the other day (not started it yet, it's pretty hefty and intimidating). I shall seek out Lucky Jim and The History Man.

grant>

1 - Useful explanation, thanks.

2 - Yeah, those 50s B-movies were mostly pro-science, I think. Alien commies were the big villains then, with their lust for Earth women and that. Even in the ones where atom bomb explosions caused ants to grow big (Them!) or woke Krakens up (The Kraken Wakes) it wasn't the scientists who cocked up but the army. I want to say that the 60s and 70s were down on scientists, but I can only think of pro versions again (eg: The Andromeda Strain). Does HAL count as an intellectual? (Cold, inhuman, pure mind etc)

Olulabelle>

Not a bad example that - I reckon Doctor Bunsen Honeydew is a perfect example of a dozy scientist, and Beaker is the archetypal ordinary man getting it in the neck as a result of the uncaring Doctor's ruthless quest for knowledge.

15:21 / 24.02.04

QUICKS-O-TI!!!

Thats how i said it anyway, until i was told it was QE-HO-TE.

Stupid language! I'm gonna make a damn PRO-NOUNC-EEE-A-SCHION thread if no-one beats me tao it.

In other words : i'm lazy, but i might get around to it. I need to be pronouncing God/Goddess names correctly when i'm casting spells or i'm gonna be peeing the powers off.

Make teh thread dommit!

17:32 / 24.02.04

I think QUICK-SOTE is an acceptable variation. And, of course, if you resemble him, you're only ever QUICKSOTIC.

And in case you make the same mistake spelling 'pronunciation' as you do pronouncing it (and this fouls your search), that thread already exisits.

19:22 / 24.02.04

exisits. Did you do that on purpose?

19:39 / 24.02.04

Why olulabelle, of course I did. It was actually a...very...umm...clever....errr... No.
Whoops.

20:02 / 24.02.04

Ages ago in rules of life thread, or similar, it said you should never correct a spelling/typo error without making one in the same setnense.

Right. So I am getting stomach muscles like a man, and it's slightly gross. More so, because they stop above my belly button. Why is this?
a) Am I only doing excersizes to strengthen the upper-stomach ones?
b) Are there only upper-stomach ones?
c) Are the lower ones there, but disguised by flab?

20:16 / 24.02.04

There are lower ones and you do need to do different exercises for them. And in your case I very much doubt your lower abdominal muscles are disguised by flab.

I only know Ashtanga Yoga and I'm not sure the specific poses would suit you if you just want to fix a particular bit of body and not take on the whole ethos. But if you Google 'Lower Abdominal Exercises' there are heaps and heaps of options online. I'm loath to pick one for you in case you did yourself a serious injury, because then I'd feel responsible. But have a look.

20:36 / 24.02.04

Christ, Olulabelle; thanks for your help, but now Im very much frightened that I may turn into the lady on this page

20:43 / 24.02.04

But...she's beautiful! Why would you not want to be her?

She's just one of those people who Takes Things A Bit Too Far. But bless her for trying. Look at that pose.

Page: 1 ... 31 32 33 34 35(36)37 38 39 40 41... 42