Humanities desk
< May 3	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 5 >

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.

May 4[edit]

How do I open a manhole?[edit]

How can a manhole be opened? How deep is it? How does one descend down safely? Will it stink? Is there a way to find out about the underground sewers without getting myself dirty? 140.254.70.33 (talk) 16:40, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See manhole. --Jayron 32 17:15, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in our article, but you need a manhole key - they come in different sizes. Failing that, they can usually be levered open with the aid of a large screwdriver and a garden spade (blimey, we're really stretching the definition of "humanities" here aren't we?). Alansplodge (talk) 17:47, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the interest and spirit of sexual equality, should we not refer to them a Person-Holes?--Aspro (talk) 17:58, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, there was some movement towards "inspection cover" for that reason, but "manhole" remains in widespread use, even by local government, formerly in the vanguard of political correctness. [1] Alansplodge (talk) 18:18, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alan, I'm surprised at you falling for the tabloid line on this. Inspection chamber/inspection cover is the correct name and always has been. It's what horny-handed sons of toil in the construction industry say, while parking up their white vans and failing to cover up their builders' bums. The Daily Mail tactic was to try and discredit "looney left" councils by finding them saying "inspection cover" and then asserting on no basis at all that it was a euphemism because "manhole" was considered sexist. This kind of stuff can only be countered by loud and lusty singing of Baa Baa Black Sheep and Three Blind Mice. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See, naturally, Loony Left for our article on _this_ subject. (Although there are certain nursery rhymes that _are_ considered unsuitable these days...) Tevildo (talk) 00:19, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the error, but I lived in Waltham Forest during the 1980s and can assure you that the "Looney Left" was not entirely the invention of the Daily Mail; truth can be stranger than fiction. Alansplodge (talk) 17:41, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Footway boxes--Phil Holmes (talk) 09:35, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There may be laws or ordinances in your jurisdiction limiting access to sewers to authorized personnel. If so, you risk arrest or a fine if you enter a manhole. There are easier ways to find out about your sewer system. Contact your local public works or public utilities department. They may be able to answer any questions, and they may have publications that would interest you. Your IP address suggests that you are in Columbus, Ohio. If so, here is the relevant link: [2] Marco polo (talk) 18:02, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Urban exploration is probably the article OP is looking for. Tevildo (talk) 21:28, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are liable to get a ticket for causing a public nuisance, if not a charge for tresspass (or manslaughter) or whatever a lawyer you consult tells you is possible in your jurisdiction--please contact your municipal sewer department and tell them you want a looksee. μηδείς (talk) 18:10, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Or just take a trip to Paris.--Phil Holmes (talk) 08:11, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why are human beings so unpredictable?[edit]

Although it would be nice to do an experiment to ascertain the cause and effect of a phenomenon, sometimes it seems that correlational studies may be easier, even though they don't provide much information beyond a correlation and may even be misleading due to a third unknown variable. Plus, scientists have to do a debriefing after deceiving for ethical purposes, which may imply that participants can intentionally go against the expected results instead of acting spontaneously like in a real-world situation. Why can't humans be more predictable and consistent in their behavior? 140.254.70.33 (talk) 17:01, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sapience, Sentience, consciousness, self-awareness, cognition, etc. --Jayron 32 17:14, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Free will, Volition_(psychology). SemanticMantis (talk) 17:24, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As far as evolution, game theory may figure in. That is, if you were totally predictable then other humans could take advantage of this. For a simple example, consider if you played poker "straight". That is, no bluffing, with each bet proportional to your hand. The other players would know approximately how good your hand was, and beat you consistently, if they could continue to bluff. So, you'd soon lose all your money due to this "consistency" gene. StuRat (talk) 18:14, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's a movie about that. See The Invention of Lying. --Jayron 32 18:15, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Or Liar Liar. StuRat (talk) 18:44, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the reason that they appear unpredictable is that one has not taken the time to get to know them properly? Star Lord - 星王 (talk) 18:51, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If humans were predictable psychopaths could manipulate them. μηδείς (talk) 19:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Humans are very predictable and its not just psychopaths that do manipulating. I think what you are talking about is why are they not more logical - but that assumes you know what would be more logical and that requires quite a bit of work to tease out Dmcq (talk) 20:30, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I posted that knowing you would respond that way. μηδείς (talk) 17:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we know that Dmcq is a master at predicting human behavior. Count Iblis (talk) 20:49, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See also here. Count Iblis (talk) 21:09, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All of my coworkers would greet customers with "How are you?" I would ask "Did you find everything you need?" The majority of customers would respond to me with "I'm fine, and you?" as though I had asked how they were. Some wouldn't even catch on, even going into details completely unrelated to "did you find everything you need?" and only relevant to "How are you?"

On different internet forums, in college, and even on this site, I've been stonewalled by Thought-terminating clichés in discussions on religion, politics, philosophy, and art, from people of various backgrounds, positions, educational levels. (I'll admit I've shot a few back myself on occasion, and that's admittedly the easiest way to deal with vandals trolls: state the guideline like a Vogon, and warn and report them). I've stopped arguments between individuals by pointing out that the thought terminating cliches they were using supported the same position. I've also started arguments with people I agreed with by pointing out a platitude they brought up was questionable.

As much as I disagree with both behavioralism and Neuro-linguistic programming, the above experiences lead me to believe most of humanity operates off of set scripts and for a lot of common interactions. If you attempt to modify these scripts, you're "weird." If you point out these scripts, you're "rude." If you try to tear apart these scripts, you're "disruptive." If you attempt to write new scripts, you're either "crazy" or "smart." Ian.thomson (talk) 21:15, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, while it is true that many iconoclasts are often perceived as problems by society, the opposite isn't always true. Sometimes an asshole is just an asshole, and isn't advancing society against the resistance of mindless drones, but rather just being obnoxious. --Jayron 32 14:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The solution, Ian.thomson, is to clearly and audibly say "Happy Tuesday!" (varying as appropriate) to anyone you greet. This forces them to respond "Happy Tuesday!" and staves off all that, "How are you doing? And you, Fine too, thank you very much!" bullshit. My local pharmacy has instituted a requirement the floor staff go through that long and tedious ritual from every worker to every customer, to the point you want to change aisles to avoid people stocking a shelf. μηδείς (talk) 18:04, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Given that my response to any child that screamed "I hate this store!" was "It's ok, I do, too," me saying "happy (anything)" would've been an obvious lie (and I can only successfully lie when drunk or blaming management). One of the few times where going outside of programming got a positive response, though. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:10, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how "Happy <whatever>" can be a lie, Ian. It's an expression of your desire that the other person have a happy whatever; it's not stating that you're having one or have any realistic expectation of ever having one. See, when you've just lambasted and reduced the store manager to tears for the shocking standard or, indeed, lack of service in their establishment, you can still end with "Good day" as you turn and flounce off in a huff. You're obviously not having a good day, and the manager is definitely not, but things can always improve, for them if not for you, and so that must remain your most fervent hope. Otherwise, why waste your breath. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:55, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Humans are complicated. Everyone has experiences, current conditions, and predilections which vary widely and conflict. Mr.Magik-Pants (talk) 18:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Traffic Lights - Red, Yellow, and GO![edit]

Are traffic lights programmed to switch between green and red lights at different set times of the day? How do traffic lights keep all the vehicles orderly? How do pedestrian buttons (the buttons that you press to cross the street) interfere or interact with the flow of traffic lights? Are there hidden cameras in the traffic lights to catch speeding motor vehicles or to adjust to the traffic on the road? If a traffic light is broken, what type of person maintains the traffic light? 140.254.136.157 (talk) 18:28, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen our Traffic lights article? --TammyMoet (talk) 18:36, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If a flashing yellow light means "proceed with caution", what does a green light mean ? "Proceed with reckless abandon" ? StuRat (talk) 18:38, 4 May 2015 (UTC) [reply]

The variation on this that I grew up with is "green means go" "yellow means go like hell" MarnetteD|Talk 18:41, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think this depends on where you are. As UK amber means stop (unless you've aready started to cross the stop line or cause an accident) while in the States yellow means about to become red. Dja1979 (talk) 05:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a joke that's probably been around since traffic lights were invented. What normal yellow means is "the light is about to turn red." And there's this old saying: "Stop when it's red / Go when it's green / And don't sneak through / When it's in-between." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:57, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Position at about the 30 second mark of this 1940s item:[3] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:59, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where I live, yellow means stop if it's safe, red means stop at all cost. Plasmic Physics (talk) 23:07, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Major roads tend to be timed to assist the traffic pattern, while smaller roads may not be. As for where smaller roads meet major roads, there they may wait until a car is detected on the small road, then wait for the next opportunity to turn the light green without interrupting the pattern on the main road. StuRat (talk) 18:42, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The big change where I live was computerization of the traffic light grid. Before that the lights were timed the same 24 hours a day - now they are timed one way during most of the day but from 12 am to 6am they can be very different. MarnetteD|Talk 18:45, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Useful information. 140.254.136.157 (talk) 18:48, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't drive much, but in my parents' town in NJ there are two noticeable patterns. During high traffic periods, the signals are timed longer to allow traffic at a standstill to accelerate, and the exclusive left turn signals are activated separately from and before the general green lights to accommodate more left-hand turning traffic that would otherwise never get across the oncoming traffic. At night the left turn signals don't activate, as one can still turn left, given the lack of heavy oncoming traffic. Also, sensors in the pavement detect whether a lane has traffic. This is a problem at one intersection where they put the sensor too far forward, and if the first car in the left turning lane doesn't pull all the way forward (basically with his nose in the highway) the light will not activate, even if there are twelve cars waiting to turn. Many signals at night simply won't change to allow traffic from smaller roads to enter the still busy highways at all unless there's pressure from a car on the sensor at the light. Hence pedestrians have to push a button on the light pole if they wish to cross, or they will stand there until a car comes. μηδείς (talk) 19:30, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You will sometimes see a person get off of his/her motorcycle and walk over and press the pedestrian button, for just this reason (either because the bike is not heavy enough, or large enough to trigger the automatic switch). The article above suggests that some of the switches respond to weight, while others, a magnetic field. Llamabr (talk) 20:37, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am a cyclist and use the roads, but when it comes to turning or using roundabouts, I always go onto the pavement and use the pedestrian crossing. In Japan, you are required by law to do this. I don't know about here in the UK, but I think it's a good idea.

KägeTorä - (影 虎) (もしもし！)

07:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As it should be, that is illegal in the UK, and can cost you a £30 fine. As a keen cyclist myself, there is nothing more infuriating than seeing people cycle on the pavement. 131.251.254.154 (talk) 09:02, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you're OK about children cycling on the pavement. We always did when I was a kid in the Middle Ages. I wish the roads were safer for kids but actually they aren't. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:37, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I actually get off the bike, and walk it across, then when I get to the other side, I get back on the road again. I have an action-cam (CCTV) on my handlebars, and always take videos in case there is the inevitable nutcase who jumps the lights, or if I need it as evidence of verbal abuse ("Get off the road, you stupid f**ker" - which does happen a lot, because apparently the bit in the driving guide saying that bicycles are legally required to use the road is completely ignored by tanked-up Ford Escort owners), and also for evidence in case of an accident. Someone gets banged up in prison, and I get free money. I should turn professional. :)

KägeTorä - (影 虎) (もしもし！)

12:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I see, yeah that's fine. A massive waste of time, but not illegal. And I hear you about arsehole drivers..... 131.251.254.154 (talk) 15:31, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Toucan crossing--Phil Holmes (talk) 09:33, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's a crossing from shared paths, different thing altogether. 131.251.254.154 (talk) 10:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]