Miscellaneous desk
< October 11	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 13 >

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.

October 12[edit]

MoU[edit]

Any articles on MoU (Minutes of Use) used by operators, and what are the main drivers behind using them or erlang for traffic calculations ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.229.237.43 (talk) 11:09, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chess winning odds[edit]

According to the chessgames site, the winning statistics are clearly in favor of white (looking at the five most popular opening moves). Is that correct? Does white have an advantage? Gil_mo (talk) 14:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While White has an apparent edge, chess tournaments have each player play equal numbers of games as White and Black, thus making the edge irrelevant. Home teams in sports also have an apparent advantage, but it all evens out. Collect (talk) 14:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article about this: First-move advantage in chess. Chess is theoretically solvable, but practically (given the large number of moves and pieces), unsolvable. Statistically, white wins more than black. The edge is small; with white getting about 52%-55% of the points in high level play. Buddy431 (talk) 18:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, does anyone know the theorem that says that games like chess are solvable (perfect information, two players take turns, no randomness). I know that it's been referenced on these desks before (probably math), but I can't find it. It was named after someone. Buddy431 (talk) 19:07, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That hardly seems to require a theorem. The number of possible games is finite (because of the rule that repeating the position three times gives a draw), and any game with a finite set of lines of play is solvable (theoretically) by enumeration of all possibilities. Looie496 (talk) 19:19, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but someone definitely referenced one of our articles in connection with a question like this. I think it was named after someone, but it might not have had "theorem" in the title. Buddy431 (talk) 20:47, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found it: Zermelo's theorem (game theory). It was in response to this question on the math desk. It doesn't say quite what I though it did, which is why I was having trouble finding it. And it doesn't apply to chess, because draws are possible. Buddy431 (talk) 20:50, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you've managed to surprise me — I thought that theorem was due to Gale and Stewart. But it turns out that the Gale–Stewart theorem says a little bit more — it relaxes the requirement that the game be over in finitely many moves, to the requirement that the same player always win if the game takes infinitely many moves. --Trovatore (talk) 08:26, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the First-move advantage in chess link answers the question, but see also Solving chess: chess is not (yet) "solved". WikiDao ☯ (talk) 02:00, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perfume[edit]

Does anyone know where I can find the following perfume to purchase: Goccia di Cristallo? I cannot seem to find it anywhere. Thanks. (64.252.1.135 (talk) 17:01, 12 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Second result in a Google search is http://www.perfumeemporium.com/womens-perfume/6620/Borsari-Goccia-Di-Cristallo.html Rojomoke (talk) 18:56, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I found that (originally) also. But, it is "out of stock" there ... and seemingly everywhere else. Any thoughts ...? Thanks. (64.252.1.135 (talk) 20:05, 12 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Is it perfume from a dress that makes me so digress? —— Shakescene (talk) 20:16, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an official site anywhere? That might have some buying information somewhere. Chevy monte carlo - alt 21:01, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had the same problem with Monsieur Givenchy. So I contacted Givenchy. They said it had been discontinued - but then, later, it was restored due to demand. So contact the makers and ask.Froggie34 (talk) 06:46, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! (64.252.1.135 (talk) 01:37, 14 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Ebay has a few bottles - always a good place to check for anything that's been discontinued (if this in fact has been discontinued). The spam filter won't let me post my search results, but just go to ebay.com and put in the name of the perfume. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Travelling to Oslo?[edit]

After translating the Swedish translation of the the original Norwegian article about the East End and West End of Oslo, I've been invited to visit Oslo. I'd like to make use of this invite on my upcoming third InterRail trip next year, first from Stockholm to Oslo, and from there to some city in eastern Europe, and from there to Austria. So I am asking in advance, what is there to see in Oslo? What are the main tourist sights? Any special places of interest? Oslo is the only capital city in the mainland Nordic countries I've never been to. I've been to Helsinki, Stockholm and Copenhangen, but never to Oslo. (I've never been to Reykjavik, or Iceland at all for that matter, but it's so far away.) The only cities I've been to in Norway are in Troms and Finnmark, so Oslo would be quite a new experience for me. How long should I stay in Oslo? I'm planning about two to three full days, is this enough? Where should I live in? I don't speak Norwegian, but I do speak Swedish. Is this enough to be able to communicate with the locals? JIP | Talk 18:15, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

JIP, you clearly have very good English. I think that nearly all Norwegians under age 50 or so speak and understand English. Probably they can make out Swedish, too, so you should be fine. Wikitravel has an extensive article on Oslo. Marco polo (talk) 00:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had no problems in Oslo with just English. Given that Swedish and Norwegian are mutually intelligible to a certain extent, you'll be fine. Oldelpaso (talk) 11:43, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have found that most Norwegians speak better English than the English, even in quite remote areas. I have also heard Norwegians and Swedes conversing in their respective languages without difficulty. Norwegians complain that they have trouble understanding Danes however. Alansplodge (talk) 21:21, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Norwegian friends tell me that Danish isn't a language, it's a throat disease (apologies to any Danes that may be watching). Mikenorton (talk) 21:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I was there I went to the Kon-Tiki museum (http://www.kon-tiki.no/e_aapning.php) and the Vigeland Sculpture Park (http://members.cox.net/c.kau/Vigeland/) and enjoyed both experiences. --Phil Holmes (talk) 16:03, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Togas[edit]

Why did the ancient Romans wear togas all the time? Wouldn't they be uncomfortable in Rome's Mediterranean summers? --70.245.189.11 (talk) 20:13, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Togas were quite loose, so I'd imagine they wouldn't be that uncomfortable to wear. Chevy monte carlo - alt 21:00, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They also didn't wear them all the time. they were only for special occasions, and I think banned at one point. 148.197.121.205 (talk) 21:15, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

QI says a lot of people hated wearing the things, because they were huge and cumbersome. I'll see if I can find the video... Vimescarrot (talk) 22:15, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the video. Vimescarrot (talk) 22:19, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Searching for the word "toga" on this QI episode summary page finds the relevant info. It's not very detailed, though, and of course we don't know their sources. A law had to be passed to force people to wear them, because they didn't want to. Vimescarrot (talk) 22:19, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about that law specifically, but there were laws about who could wear togas, what colour they could be, and what other sorts of decorations they could have on them. And of course they didn't wear togas all the time; they were like formal business clothes, which some of us wear more often than others, but not all the time. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:13, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When one has worn loose clothes in a hot country one appreciates their value and the good sense of those who wear them. Of course a toga is not a light garment, but it is free flowing. On another note - they must have really encouraged a dignified stance and an elegant look.Froggie34 (talk) 06:44, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As has already been mentioned above, togas was formal wear. Tunics was daily wear. We also have a clothing in ancient Rome article (though it could use some work). --Saddhiyama (talk) 18:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we know people in Rome did find the summers hot. The rich (enough) holidayed away from Rome, if they lived there usually. - Jarry1250 ^{[Who? Discuss.]} 18:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]