Humanities desk
< August 7	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 9 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

August 8[edit]

Tadashi Yasuda[edit]

Hello. Can anyone help find any biographical information on this painter Tadashi Yasuda? Maybe searching in Japanese will help. I am getting nothing except sales of his paintings.KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:07, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are several Tadashi Yasudas listed here. Maybe that will give you some leads. --Jayron 32 16:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Light-field camera[edit]

Light-field camera reads:

   "A light field camera, also known as plenoptic camera, captures information about the light field emanating from a scene; that is, the intensity of light in a scene, and also the direction that the light rays are traveling in space. This contrasts with a conventional camera, which records only light intensity. "

1. Does the human capture both the intensity of light and direction of light? Or does the human eye only record light intensity like a conventional camera?

2. This product[1] claims that "the light can only be interpreted by a human — not a camera — so part of his problem in launching his product is that he can't film the experience". Presumbly the "camera" here is referring to a conventional camera. Would a Light-field camera be able to capture this special vision? Mũeller (talk) 13:57, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For #1: Human eye or human visual processing system? The brain has ways of using information in both eyes to create a sense of directionality and depth perception which is above and beyond what the retina records directly. Vision is a complex thing. --Jayron 32 15:03, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Employment contract buyouts in Spain[edit]

Can a football player take the money intended for buying out a contract in Spain [2] and convert it into a crypto like Bitcoin then run away with the money? Obviously their real-world possessions would be confiscated, so that'd be a big deterrent. 161.185.161.31 (talk) 16:28, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

By what law would his possessions be "confiscated"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:24, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also confused about how the OP thinks that would work. Reading their source, the player either pays the buyout money to the league, or does not. If he doesn't, his old contract is still valid, and his new contract would be void. I fail to see how the hypothetical situation described would change that. If the player were to embezzle money which was not otherwise his, there would likely be legal ramifications, but if he doesn't want to change teams, he doesn't have to pay the buyout. If he does want to change teams, he does have to pay they buyout. I don't see the scenario the OP is describing as happening. The article they linked gave no indication that it did. --Jayron 32 17:43, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The guy paid 71 million euros to get out of his contract. Do you think he had that much money to spare? Obviously he had been given that sum by the buying club. 161.185.160.26 (talk) 19:05, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If he was able to pay 71 million, he must have already had 71 million. And, I ask again, by what mechanism could his possessions be confiscated? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:14, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Look up Neymar buying his way out of Barca. No, even footballers don't have this kind of money. 161.185.160.26 (talk) 19:50, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then how did he do it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:57, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, it is his new team that really pays the release fee to the old team. Knowing that they will have to cover this fee is part of their considerations in deciding what kind of contract to offer the player. Dragons flight (talk) 20:23, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Modern name of "Abuscheher"[edit]

Heinrich Berghaus compiled an early atlas of global climate. Writing (I think) in the 1830s, one of the locations he mentioned was "Abuscheher". I would like to know the modern name for this location? He gave the geographic coordinates 28.25 N, 50.90 E, which is in the Persian Gulf. However, Berghaus was not a very reliable reporter of geography and his locations can by off by several degrees (especially the longitude). It is likely that "Abuscheher" refers to a port city, town, or island in the Persian Gulf. Probably somewhere that European sailors of that era would have cause to visit frequently. Does anyone have any idea what the modern name for "Abuscheher" might be? Dragons flight (talk) 18:07, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Must be Bushehr, which was Persia's main trading port in the past and was at times occupied by the Dutch and British. According to our page the coordinates are pretty close, 28°58′N 50°50′E. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:37, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This 18th century French-language source calls it "Abuschähhr, or as the English write it, Buscheer". --Antiquary (talk) 18:49, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think Bushehr must be it. Thank you. I think in my head I was stuck looking for something starting with "A". Dragons flight (talk) 19:37, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given its location in the Persian Gulf region, the "a" is probably derived from the Arabic article "al". --Khajidha (talk) 21:38, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Normally I would say anything starting with Bu- or Bou- comes from the Arabic "abu", and Berghaus' name for it would also seem to be evidence of that. But, at least according to our article, it long predates any possible Arabic influence. It was called Ram Ardeshir, then Rey Shahr, then that somehow became Bushehr. Adam Bishop (talk) 11:03, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Civilian inventions in the military[edit]

What civilian inventions and innovations went into subsequent military usage (akin to the opposite - military inventions in civilian service)? Excluding some shared common things, like metalworking processes, etc. Thanks. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 20:43, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The rifle was used for hunting while armies preferred smoothbores because they were faster to load.
Sleigh (talk) 21:00, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Continuous tracks (as used on tanks) come to mind. Cheers ✦ _hugarheimur 21:25, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The airplane, surely. Adam Bishop (talk) 22:46, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Barbed wire, originally invented to fence in cattle. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.136.119 (talk) 22:55, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

TNT, originally used as a dye, then used in weaponry › Mortee _talk 23:01, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the motor car in all its incarnations. Cheers ✦ _hugarheimur 01:38, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Radio, telephone, and so on. Telescopes. The Enigma machine. Arguably electronic computers, depending on what you count—their history is complicated and different projects had both military and civilian origins. --76.69.47.228 (talk) 04:17, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The knife, spear and bow and arrow are all older armies, and possibly older than warfare (depending on how you define "war"). Iapetus (talk) 07:51, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gunpowder is first mentioned in Europe as the ingredient of a "children's toy" in Opus Majus of 1267. Alansplodge (talk) 10:54, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References for the Society for Social Studies of Science[edit]

Hello. I've been editing Society for Social Studies of Science, the main international academic organization for the field of science and technology studies (which is my own field). The organization is currently tagged for notability, so I've been trying to find independent sources that explain what the organization is. I've hit four main roadblocks.

The organization is so significant within the field that they publish most major works about the field, for example, the Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Social Studies of Science, and Science, Technology, & Human Values. The only time other major STS societies say anything about them is during a joint meeting, such as when they organized with EASST or when they organized with ESOCITE. It also gets mentioned in a handful of websites of universities/academic units, but almost always ones that are fairly closely affiliated, like Harvard or IstanbuLab.
The only major news about the organization regards its conferences (usually in a somewhat negative light). These articles reference the org as a notable organization, but only in passing. See, e.g., this NYT piece or this Campus Reform piece
The only things that I find written by others are clearly lifted from the organization's own marketing materials (e.g. their profile by the International Science Council or the Philosophy of Science Association's related org page.
Paywalls to organizational databases.

I suspect that a potential way out of this is to find references to the organization in STS books, but nothing immediately comes to mind. Any help with reference finding? - - mathmitch7 ^{(talk/contribs)} 21:43, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would a university magazine article explaining the society to their students be usable? See [3], or do you count that as too closely affiliated? 70.67.222.124 (talk) 15:20, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can add it to the article for now, but as it's about an event hosted by the society, I don't this source alone would be enough to remove the notability tag. - - mathmitch7 ^{(talk/contribs)} 15:30, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think this may be a typical “big fish in a small pond” problem... when no one outside of a small pond takes note of the big fish dominating the pond (and indeed may not even take note of the pond itself), how do we establish that the big fish is notable? Blueboar (talk) 18:13, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]