Humanities desk
< October 5	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 7 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities 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.

October 6[edit]

Time zone offset covering largest area[edit]

Which UTC offset covers the largest geographical area of land?

I would guess it's either UTC+08:00 (China, parts of Russia and Mongolia, lots of southeast Asia, Western Australia]]; UTC+01:00 (most of western and central Europe, a large swathe of Africa); or UTC−03:00 (Greenland, some of Canada, much of South America).

This surely must be answered somewhere, but my google-fu is letting me down. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 13:22, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't have discarded UTC+5.5 (India) right away, but having such a unique UTC implies that Indians are not in the same as others. The problem with UTC-3 is that it excludes Brazil. UTC+1 excludes the UK, South African, Kenia, and Sudan, which have large populations.

Though the question is about geographical area (of land), not population. -- Q Chris (talk) 13:58, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At the end the winner is UTC+8. It's difficult to compete with the whole of China in the same time-zone. [1]. --Scicurious (talk) 13:53, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Though the question is about geographical area (of land), not population. -- Q Chris (talk) 13:58, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry misread the question. Maybe the calculation of the link above can be adapted.--Scicurious (talk) 14:01, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It may still be China. It looks largest but I know that map projections can be misleading. -- Q Chris (talk) 14:02, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at it in Google Earth (i.e. on a globe), I also think that UTC+8 (China etc.) appears to be the largest, with the closest competitors being UTC+1 and UTC+3. - Lindert (talk) 14:52, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answers everyone. I'm really surprised there's no definitive answer available anywhere - I'll have to go on appearance. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 09:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

IMO it's UTC+8 too, but I didn't look at any globe, and only looked at UTC+1 and to some extent UTC-3 in addition. The source by Scicurious mentions Mathematica I don't have that, but Wolfram Alpha is free and also for someone to check. Unfortunately given the large amount of data involved, Pro, which isn't free would be ideal, but I don't have it.

For UTC+1 and presuming our article is accurate. Using what's available without Pro if we do [2] 'land area of Algeria + land area of Angola + land area of Benin + land area Cameroon + land area of Central African Republic + land area of Chad + land area of Republic of the Congo' we get 6435000 km²; [3] 'land area of Equatorial Guinea + land area of Gabon + land area of Niger + land area of Nigeria + land area Tunisia' 2619000 km²; [4] 'land area of Albania + land area of Andorra + land area of Austria + land area of Belgium + land area of Bosnia and Herzegovina + land area of Croatia + land area of Czech Republic' 324997 km²; [5] 'land area of Denmark + land area of France + land area of Germany + land area of Gibraltar + land area of Hungary + land area of Italy + land area of Liechtenstein + land area of Luxembourg' 1328000 km²; [6] 'land area of Macedonia + land area of Malta + land area of Monaco + land area of Montenegro + land area of Netherlands + land area of Norway + land area of Poland + land area of San Marino' 681694 km², 'land area of Serbia + land area of Slovakia + land area of Slovenia + land area of Spain + land area of Sweden + land area of Switzerland + land area of Vatican City' 1095000 km²,[7] 'area of Bandudu Province + area of Bas-Congo + area of Équateur + area of Kinshasa' 762835 km² which gives a total 13246526 square kilometres.

Caveats for these results include that I'm suspect France may include overseas departments and stuff in different time zones. I'm presuming it doesn't include Greenland for Norway, the figure is too low for that. Faroe Islands are I guess irrelevant. Also the general caveat about area for the DRC places and other issues.

For UTC+8 [8] 'land area of china + land area of taiwan + land area of the philippines + land area of malaysia + land area of brunei + land area of singapore' 9991000 km²; [9] 'area of south kalimantan + area of east kalimantan + area of lesser sunda islands + area of sulawesi' 434321 km²; [10] 'area of western australia' 2527620 km²; [11] 'area of irkutsk Oblast + area of Buryatia + area of Zabaykalsky Krai' 1550700 km² which gives 14503641 square kilometres which is more than the previous. Mongolia will give [12] 'land area of mongolia' something under 1554000 extra km².

Caveats for this are that I don't know whether China includes HK or possibly Macau, although I guess these are irrelevant. Also, caveats about area, particularly in this case since we have several island nations and other general caveats. Note that the issue of not knowing the age or source or quality if data is particularly clear for Russia, the intepreted names seem a bit different from what our articles would suggest. Although Time in Russia then following the links gives 767,900 + 351,300 + 431,500 = 1230700 km² compared to the 1.5 million so it seems to be more. For Western Australia and or China however, the figures in our articles seem to be more than Wolfram Alpha gives.

I didn't analyse UTC-3 much. [13] 'land area of suriname + land area of French Guiana + land area of Argentina + land area of Chile + land area of Falkland Islands + land area of Uruguay + land area of Bermuda' gives 3913000 km². [14] 'land area of Greenland' is 2116000 km² (which for once is similar to our article). Brazil is complicated but [15] 'land area of brazil' gives 8459000 km². Combined with the others, this gives 14488000 square kilometres which is still less than earlier for UTC+8. And I'm pretty sure you should exclude a resonable amount of Brazil in this figure, and include most of Mongolia in earlier

Some caveats: I'm not sure the source and quality of Wolfram Alpha's land area figures, and how they deal with disputes regions and stuff although I don't know these will be that significant for most that were looked at. However area estimations will vary depending on how they're determined even with these, and I compared a few to our articles (mostly as highlighted) and they were often somewhat different. I would hope that Wolfram Alpha is largely consistent, but don't really know.

Also, land area doesn't seem to work with subentities, only area hence why I used area for these. So I'm even less certain what subentity area data is. I guess it's probably irrelevant in general, although may make a bigger difference in island nations. Note also I didn't check carefully that Wolfram Alpha appeared to be intepreting each query properly. BTW (country 1 + country 2 + ....) land area semi works, but gives funny results the one time I tried it missing out the first 2 countries. In any case, converting the list to land area + was easy with search and replace. Main problem is it makes the strings longer so need to be split up more.

Nil Einne (talk) 15:48, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BTW I'm a bit confused about the inclusion of Canada in the earlier list. IMO it makes sense to count concuring timezones, so for example, summer timezones in Brazil and winter timezones in Canada. If you want to get technical, since the countries have different rules on daylight saving time changes where they exist, some timezones may coincide for short periods of time, but I would personally think it makes more sense to only include long term co-occurances. (Also why not look at history if you're going to include short term co-occurances which probably aren't occuring now?)

Some may prefer to only include standard timezones, which are normally defined as the winter timezones, with the daylight saving timezones (or sometimes called summer timezones) being effectively 'non-standard'. But this would seem to be complicated, you need to check the laws of each individual country to make sure they really define their winter timezones as standard time and don't have a situation like Ireland where the summer time is actually the standard time; or even don't define either as standard (and what do you do then?). I definitely wouldn't trust our articles on this, it seems to be the kind of thing people may easily assume without properly checking.

Either way, if I understand our article and Time in Canada, the only way you would get parts of Canada along with (most of) Greenland would be if you include any timezones that's used for part of the year, even if these may not cooccur (although I didn't look at the possible short term concurances). But if you're including timezones used for any part of the year, this complicates things and from what I understand, it isn't just parts of Mongolia but all of it.

Nil Einne (talk) 15:48, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm presuming it doesn't include Greenland for Norway," ... actually for Denmark. Hayttom (talk) 12:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For UTC+3, using the areas given in the Wikipedia articles for European Russia, Belarus, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Sudan, South Sudan, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Somalia, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Madagascar, and Comoros, I get 14,029,727km^2. This is less than Nil Einne's calculation for UTC+8, but uses different data set. UTC+2 looks like it has more area in Africa than UTC+3, but less in Europe, so I may take a look at that if I have time.--Wikimedes (talk) 03:57, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Religious articles sought[edit]

I'm searching for articles that are relative to the human growth developement? E.g., what happens a soul or an egg before/after birth... Can you guys help me please? -- Space Ghost (talk) 21:36, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if that's what you're asking, but the moment that people are hypothesized to receive a soul is called Ensoulment. - Lindert (talk) 21:42, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Noted! I'll definitely read this in time. Thanks -- Space Ghost (talk) 18:32, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An egg, in mammalian terms, is merely a gamete, a cell. It is not a human being and does not have a "soul". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:42, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There must be something. A WP article I read once stating how some Christians take a zygote/egg/embryo of a human containing a soul - the 'conception/moment of conception' words were used. For Islam, I heard that God writes destiny around the time of a zygote/egg/embryo. Basically I'm searching for information as similar as after death information, e.g., grave time, Heaven, Paradise, Hell, sheol, purguatory, Judgement day, and so on. Another e.g., I'm basically looking for something where it states 'what happens to a soul/spirit before it is entered into a body of any being. Say something like, they get made in Heaven or Hell, kept somewhere, then get sent on earth, and so on. -- Space Ghost (talk) 18:32, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A zygote is a fertilized ovum or egg cell. Religionists argue that it has a soul. A gamete, i.e. an egg cell or a sperm cell, is not a human being, does not have a soul. Seems to me we had this same discussion a few months ago. The answer remains the same. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:48, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes we've had, I'm just wondering if we had an article created yet or not. I don't have the knowledge and I'm learning, you know!

-- Space Ghost (talk) 20:22, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reincarnation talks about beliefs of about souls, when they enter, when they leave, etc. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:45, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've used this word with definition(s) already in order to mean what it says. Something more specific like, what and how a fresh soul/spirit appears in the world, where its made/stored beforehand...before it enters through the afterlife procedures, and of course, before it lives its life...if you guys know what I mean. -- Space Ghost (talk) 19:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because there are many different religions, there is no one definitive, specific answer. The answers you already have are about as comprehensive as you can get: if you want others, you must look at other religions. --TammyMoet (talk) 13:33, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with above: no single answer possible. For specifics, see several articles on several religious traditions' various concepts of soul, expertly summarized, with bibliographies, in volume 12 of the second edition (2005) of Encyclopedia of Religion (Lindsay Jones, editor), pp. 8530-8571, including:

Soul: Ancient Near Eastern Concepts
Soul: Buddhist Concepts
Soul: Chinese Concepts
Soul: Christian Concepts
Soul: Concepts In Indigenous Religions
Soul: Greek And Hellenistic Concepts
Soul: Indian Concepts
Soul: Islamic Concepts
Soul: Jewish Concepts

Any public library should have this standard, authoritative reference. 40 pages not too much to copy or scan. Find it at a library near you: ISBN 0-02-865981-3 -- Paulscrawl (talk) 15:09, 8 October 2015 (UTC)-[reply]

Okay friends thanks

-- Space Ghost (talk) 18:34, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Lindert, Baseball Bugs, SemanticMantis, and TammyMoet:OP wants to know about the various religious narratives about ensoulment. example:religion alpha says soul enters during embryo stage, religion beta says soul enters during third trimester, so on and on.Mahfuzur rahman shourov (talk) 04:39, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[[File:|20px]] Religious nattatives would be of great help too. -- Space Ghost (talk) 20:22, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that most religious texts were written centuries before the reproductive process was known at the micro level, the best you're going to find are modern "opinions" on the matter. There won't be any historical religious texts that are going to say anything about sperm and eggs. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:58, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs, you underestimate the capacity of religionists to write about scientific matters without needing to know anything. Has Galileo taught you nothing?! :) Aristotle taught a progressive ensoulment with a fetus having first a vegetable soul, later an animal soul, and yet later a human soul. The human soul was inserted 40 days after conception for male fetuses, and 90 days for female. This was repeated by St. Augustine. Sort of like the U.S. Supreme Court's "1st trimester" or 90 days. And Pope Innocent III wrote that ensoulment occurs at the "quickening", when a woman first feels her fetus move. So lack of scientific knowledge didn't impede religious people from opining, and examples can be found throughout history, it's not just a modern thing. - Nunh-huh 00:27, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Those are religionist theories about events after (or at the point of) conception. If there are any ancient texts which discuss gamete cells, it would be fun to see them. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Roughtor, Cornwall, given to the nation[edit]

On Roughtor in Cornwall is a plaque saying it was given to the nation in memory of the men of the 43rd (Wessex) Division who lost their lives in the North-West European Campaign 1944/45. What I would like to know is a) by whom it was given, and b) to whom - was it the National Trust, some organ of the State, or some other such body? DuncanHill (talk) 23:09, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, interesting question. The report from Time Team's excavation of the site says that "The site at Roughtor is under private ownership and is in use by the Commoners’ Association for animal grazing. The area is also a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and thus under the protection and management of English Nature. The nature of the archaeological remains are considered of national importance and thus they have been designated as Scheduled Ancient Monuments (Nos. 15548 and 15584)."

The database of common land suggests that ownership is disputed: "Disputed and part excluded. Tehidy Minerals Ltd claim one undivided third of the freehold mines, minerals and mineral substances, including china clay, granite, gravel, sand and clay. Five parts owned by five private owners. Part owned jointly by twoprivate owners. Part owned by the National Trust."

The schedule of historic monuments doesn't help with ownership, but it does give a potential date, in 1977, which might be when the bequest took place.

Other than that, I haven't been able to find any helpful information, except that the Land Registry can be viewed for a fee of £3. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 11:02, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According to this site and this document (page 29 - apologies for the URL) from the National Trust, it was given by Sir Richard Onslow (1906-1963), seventh of the Onslow baronets (of Althain), in 1951. Tevildo (talk) 11:25, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both - the Time Team site was below Roughtor, not actually up on it, so could well have another owner. Ownership of mines and minerals in Cornwall is rarely combined with ownership of the land, and Tehidy Minerals are one of the major mineral lords (owners of mines and minerals) in Cornwall. Looks like I need to hunt down Sir Richard Onslow! DuncanHill (talk) 15:01, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This booklet produced by the local WI is my source for his identity (page 12), if it's helpful. Tevildo (talk) 15:07, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Found a little more, according to Leigh Rayment Richard Onslow was living at Blisland in 1931 when his father Sir Roger shot himself at Hengar Manor in St Tudy, both not too far from Roughtor, and there are memorials to the Onslows at Blisland Church. I know they used to own china clay pits in Cornwall. DuncanHill (talk) 15:15, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]