q_id
stringlengths 5
6
| title
stringlengths 3
296
| selftext
stringlengths 0
34k
| document
stringclasses 1
value | subreddit
stringclasses 1
value | url
stringlengths 4
110
| answers
dict | title_urls
sequence | selftext_urls
sequence | answers_urls
sequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
af714p | why is it easy to keep a beat but it's difficult to count 'seconds' accurately in your head? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/af714p/eli5why_is_it_easy_to_keep_a_beat_but_its/ | {
"a_id": [
"edw1k8w",
"edw1w7f",
"edw34pt",
"edwiyib"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"This is because drummers ( or whoever is keeping the beat) has a good sense of groove and can lock into it. But the bpm (beats per minute) they choose is kind of arbitrary. They aren’t locked into a specific bpm but they can keep it going. They aren’t counting the beats per minute. It is very difficult to to divide that time properly. Some people have perfect Rythm which is similar to perfect pitch where people just know the bpm but this is rare.",
"As a musician, I find it harder to count seconds because my mind unconsciously takes into account the number of syllables in the second and I get thrown off balance. With beats it's just tik-tok-tik-tok-tik-tok or something similar, with seconds it goes ...five-six-***SEVEN***\\-eight-nine-ten-***ELEVEN***\\-twelve-***THIRTEEN***... then it goes haywire from there.",
"But you can!\n\nStart with a march that you can remember easily and quickly, like [Stars and Stripes Forever](_URL_0_)\n\nMarch tempo is 120bpm; \nexactly 2 beats per second.\n\nJust hum this in your head and you're pretty close to counting out accurate half-seconds, now you can keep time!",
"There are a few reasons why it's harder to count seconds.\n\n1. 60 bpm, which is the pulse of a second, is painfully slow to count. The time between pulses is large enough to throw off a lot of people. If you were to count \"1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and....etc\" you would be able to keep time more consistently.\n2. Anyone who is reasonably good at keeping a groove is subdividing, at any tempo. Whether thinking about the subdivisions of the meter, or the rhythmic elements of a specific beat, subdividing helps.\n3. I would argue most people can't keep a beat in their head (well, anyway). Ask any trained musician to think of a beat or groove in their head, and they will probably involuntarily start nodding their head, moving their limbs, tapping their fingers, or even mouthing the main beats.\n4. Keeping rhythm well also has a lot to do with language. Check out [this video](_URL_0_) on keeping time using your voice, and why counting out loud is so important to do."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/-mRn9chmRAY"
],
[
"https://youtu.be/qIfD7ZN5FYI"
]
] |
||
2p06xs | the senate torture report | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2p06xs/eli5_the_senate_torture_report/ | {
"a_id": [
"cms9az1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"[Please search before asking](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2oytne/eli5_the_current_cia_torture_scandal/"
]
] |
||
46g8n2 | why is weird al yankovic so widely popular and enjoyed? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/46g8n2/eli5_why_is_weird_al_yankovic_so_widely_popular/ | {
"a_id": [
"d04t4rh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"He sold his soul to the devil, that's why. No other explanation. He's a nerdy white guy that plays an accordion. Nowhere would that make anyone popular."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4gsqy7 | how sore should i be after working out? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gsqy7/eli5_how_sore_should_i_be_after_working_out/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2keig0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In short, you should normally be sore after working out, kind of like a deep feeling inside the muscle that is a little tender to the touch and aches a little when you use it, but it should not be in constant pain nor be really painful under any circumstances necessitated from normal use. When you're sore from working out, you're breaking down your muscles to build them back up stronger than they were, so don't keep working those muscles, give them a break for a day or two and work on something else. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1jli01 | how did apple rigg ebook prices and what was illegal about it? | A judge ruled that apple "forced Amazon (and other retailers) to relinquish retail pricing authority and then they raised retail e-book prices." How did they force other companies to change their prices? Also, please explain the spirit of the law they broke, and if applicable, exactly what apple did that broke that law.
Bonus question:
Finally what makes this different from legal anticompetitive practices like avoiding widespread standards to create vendor lock-in or buying up patents with no intention of making use of them?
See [this news story](_URL_0_) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1jli01/eli5_how_did_apple_rigg_ebook_prices_and_what_was/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbfuqd4"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Amazon was selling books for cheaper than the publishers wanted them sold, ebooks usually were much cheaper than physical books even on day of release. They basically controlled the prices at that time due to their volume as nobody else really sold very many ebooks. Publishers wanted to control the prices instead of having Amazon do so. Apple wanted into the market and has no problem using a heavy hand to exert control over the market. So Apple and the publishers agreed to a contract that allowed the publishers to set the prices and then the publishers went back to Amazon and made them sign the same thing or lose the right to sell any ebooks. At the same time, Apple refused to allow anyone else to sell ebooks directly on an iDevice without giving Apple 30% of the sale. Emails from Steve Jobs explicitly said this was to force Amazon to raise their prices because otherwise Apple could not remain competitive. \n\nThis is different because it was not done just by Apple but also included publishers. Not using standards is bad for consumers, but does not impact another company. For example, if Company A doesn't use standards for a product but Company B does, there is nothing stopping people from buying Company B products and nothing should cause company B's prices to increase as a result of company A not using standards. \n\nThe patents problem is a problem with patent law. There is usually nothing that says you have to use a patent to keep others from using it. Patent law should require the patent to be used in a meaningful way for publicly available products within the last x years (starting x years after the patent is approved) or it becomes forfeit. Not sure what x should be but you do have to allow some way for Bob in his basement to patent a product and then find someone to manufacture and sell it. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.nbcnews.com/business/apple-faces-5-year-ban-e-book-price-rigging-conspiracy-6C10825035"
] | [
[]
] |
|
9cc15m | prunes vs plums. why do prunes have more health benefits than plums? or at least people speak of prunes' health benefits, but rarely of plums. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9cc15m/eli5_prunes_vs_plums_why_do_prunes_have_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"e59kubd"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"I think the answer begins with educating people that prunes are plums. I once was talking to a regular doctor about not being regular. He said, \"Eat a lot of prunes.\" I said, \"I've been eating a lot of plums.\" He said, \"I said prunes.\" I said,\" prunes are dried plums.\" He said: [silence]."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5pm1ij | how does my amazon alexa not react when a commercial for it comes on? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5pm1ij/eli5_how_does_my_amazon_alexa_not_react_when_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcsbk54"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"I haven't seen an Alexa commercial honestly, but mine does react to my television sometimes. Since the voice recognition is really done on Amazon's servers, not in the device itself, they could have code to filter out audio clips from their own commercials."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
f7g3ci | why are people able to declare personal bankruptcy despite having substantial assets? | I've seen many times when very wealthy people declare bankruptcy despite obviously not being broke. 50 Cent maybe being the easiest example. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f7g3ci/eli5_why_are_people_able_to_declare_personal/ | {
"a_id": [
"fib2cc9",
"fib3827",
"fib3h1q",
"fib5t2o",
"fib79cd"
],
"score": [
5,
6,
4,
19,
2
],
"text": [
"It depends on who owns those assets. Does he have a Limited Liability Corporation?\n\nExample: I am a self-employed plumber. My plumber truck, tools, office are owned by a LLC I created. While not doing my job, I cause a loss for someone. Let's say I kicked a ball and broke something worth $50,000. \n\nI don't have that kind of money. Can they take my truck, tools, and office? Probably not (this could differ among jurisdictions), because having a corporation shields your business and assets from your personal life (and vice versa, a loss caused by the business doesn't necessarily mean you can lose personal assets).",
"How do you classify not being broke? Lots of bling? Six Ferraris? Big LA mansion? If you add up all of these assets they might come out to a few million dollars - if you sold them all and got top dollar for them. \n\nIn the case of celebrity or athelete bankruptcies, the amount they owe is comparable or greater than the sum total of their assets. _What? How can they rack up such huge debts? Who would loan them so much money?_ Well, their ability to pay it back. \n\nIf you're a banker, and a successful grammy winning rap star comes to you about a $10M loan to open a chain of Ice-T branded frozen yogurt smoothie shops, you look at the Ferraris and the mansion and go \"ok, so at worst, I could seize those.\" and at best, who knows, maybe the chain takes off. If you're a SMART banker you ask to see business cases, ask whose going to be running the franchising and what other business they've been part of. If you're a DUMB banker or maybe you're also a fan and a little star-struck, you get flown to a private beach on star's private jet to hang with his entourage for a week, after which you have no problem signing off on a $10M business loan. \n\nOf course I'm blurring business vs. personal here, but its this general kind of idea. \nAlso, a lot of these celebrities just flat out don't pay income tax, thats where a lot of this debt gets racked up. _How does one forget to pay income tax_? Well, if you don't have a good business manager/investment broker as part of your entourage... or worse you leave you money matters up to your cousin's sister in law husband who took an accounting course in community college.... well, they might just not be looking out for your financial well being. A lot of atheletes and celebrities wind up poor because their homies simply are homies when thigns are good and the money is rolling in, but when your latest album flops or you get cut because of a freak knee injury, all of a sudden they dissappear.\n\nLots of celebrities simply have no idea where the money comes from, who it goes to, and how its managed; and they are exceptionally easy to manipulate by those who aren't necessarily aligned with the celebrity's best interests.",
"A select cut off personal assets are not available to satisfy creditors. But mostly the rich folks you hear about going bankrupt are actually going through a corporate bankruptcy not a personal one. Sometimes though a rich person can tick assets into a trust while they are rich and then if anything happens later the assets are protected to one degree or another.",
"Bankruptcy does not mean someone has no assets. It also doesn't mean they necessarily get out of their existing debts without paying them.\n\nWhen a person or company declares bankruptcy they are saying they cannot satisfy their current debts on time or in full. The courts are asked to step in and mediate who gets paid how much and in what order/time frame.\n\nFor example if you owe $5 million due today and own a $10 million mansion without any cash you would declare bankruptcy. You have assets but they aren't liquid. You could probably sell the mansion for only $5 million nearly instantly but that would be a huge waste; the courts will decide a balance between haste and a reasonable price.",
"The bankruptcy court would typically force them to sell a lot of their assets to pay back their creditors."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2ur5zl | if we had a method of knowing the quantum state of every particle in the universe, would we be able to predict the future? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ur5zl/eli5_if_we_had_a_method_of_knowing_the_quantum/ | {
"a_id": [
"coavzwq",
"coaw953"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"No, the best minds in science and physics agree that there are truly [stochastic](_URL_0_) (or random) events in the universe. These are defined as being unable to be predicated perfectly.",
"I wont tackle real quantum mechanics for another 6 months, but I hope I can answer this question accurately.\n\nRegardless of whether or not you knew the quantum state of a particle, it would still only give you a probability density of how this particle would behave. \n\nIf we use a hydrogen atom as an example, if you changed the quantum state you would change the probability of where you would find electrons, but you would still not be able to predict exactly where they would be and where they would go next at the same time.\n\nClassical mechanics has very predictable states, you can see where something is, where it has been and where it is going. With quantum mechanics, everything is much more fluid and by nature you cannot know everything all at once. \n\nClassical mechanics is deterministic, but quantum mechanics is probabilistic. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic"
],
[]
] |
||
5hzlnn | prunes are laxative, whereas plums aren't? | How is it that when you dry out a plum, you get a laxative effect, and that laxative effect remains even after soaking the prune in water? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5hzlnn/eli5_prunes_are_laxative_whereas_plums_arent/ | {
"a_id": [
"db46iyb",
"db4bnv2"
],
"score": [
16,
7
],
"text": [
"Prunes are extremely high in fiber. \n\nPlums have the same amount of fiber, but with much more juice. When people eat plums, they usually eat 1 or 2 max. With prunes, they can kill a whole bag which is like 15 plums worth of fiber. \n\nIf you ate 15 plums you'd poop too.",
"Most stone fruit have magnesium in them, which stimulates your gut. Eat enough stone fruit (dried or fresh) you get what my Nanna used to call the Stone Fruit Sploots. Dried fruit take up less space, so you can eat more in a shorter time frame and are more likely to take on enough magnesium to overclock your guts.\n\nNanna had a damson tree in her yard, so every year she had issues with splooty grandkids as soon as they were ripe enough. We were a hard of thinking bunch."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1zkyju | why do people who live in different countries keep their native accent long term, for example arnold schwarzenegger? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zkyju/eli5_why_do_people_who_live_in_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfukduy",
"cfum55y",
"cfumglf",
"cfv7t3f"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because language acquisition occurs at a pretty young age. Part of language acquisition is learning what sounds are *language* and what sounds are *noise*. For example, adult English speakers pretty much cannot learn to speak a vastly different language, such as Mandarin, as a native because they literally either cannot tell the difference between certain sounds or cannot physically reproduce those sounds.\n\nArnold moved to the US as an adult (21) knowing very little English. So while his accent has changed over time, it will never completely go away. ",
"Up until puberty, kids can learn any language perfectly. Around puberty (and a bit earlier, it depends), your throat and brain are changing, and they lose the ability to make noises that they're not already used to (all the noises that make up your native language(s)).\n\nWhile it's possible (with effort and hard work) to reduce your accent (and, for some people, get to the point that only an expert could tell the difference), a lot of people don't bother with it once they've learned the language fluently.",
"In the specific case of Arnold Schwarzenegger, the accent is deliberately maintained.\n\nArnie's accent is so iconic and tied to his public image that he deliberately maintains it by working with an speech coach.",
"Languages have their on uhh \"infliction\". I speak two languages and have been speaking both all my life for almost 29 years. I have an accent in both languages, very faint but it exists. I am however, able to mimic other languages \"infliction\" pretty well, but still have an accent. \n\nfor example my mom CANNOT say debt, she grew up in a country where the written language and it's alphabet was written as it sounds...\n\nfor example in the english language the letter a can be, apple, road, all, freak and the individual letter a has a different sound based on that word...\n\nIn my native language, that is not the case, the language structure will identify for you with an accent mark above the a to let you know its actual pronounciation. So, in her language theb in debt will NEVEr be silent.. for 50 years she has been conditioned witht he notion that silent letters dont exist...\n\nSo any word she says or reads with silent letters is just jacked up....\nshe cant say knife, debt, antelope, etc etc.. because she wull sound out the word fully\nshe says \"debuht\" \"ante lopee\" \"kanifee\"\n\nThe way we assign infliction in letters is just engraved in our minds, most people do not know why or how we make the distinction in our letters, we are just conditioned to that.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
10eakf | - what is the difference between jump starting and push starting a car, and how and when would i do one or the other? | Title says it all really. I gathered that jump starting is the one with the cables and another car, and a push start involves, well, pushing the car and some clutch work. Can someone clue me in on how exactly you would carry out each one though? Also, what exactly is the difference? From what I understand they're both done when the battery is dead, so is there an advantage to doing one over the other? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10eakf/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_jump_starting/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6cpq1n",
"c6cpz9u",
"c6cqzb5",
"c6crjni"
],
"score": [
7,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Push starting, or 'popping the clutch' only works with a manual transmission. It has the advantage that it doesn't require a second car or jumper cables, but it only works on hills.\n\nFunctionally, the key difference is that a jump start requires a functioning starter motor to work, whereas popping the clutch does not, and will work even if your starter is bad.",
"I agree with most of nalc, but think it would be possible to push start on a flat road, particularly if several people are pushing. ",
"Jump starting is simply attaching cables to allow the \"dead\" car to use the electricity form the boosting car's battery to engage the starter drive to start the engine on the dead vehicle. This can be done with virtually any gas powered vehicle, as long as it has a working starter.\n\nPush starting only works on manual transmission cars, and old automatics (pre- 1970's, modern torque converters do not allow this) by rolling the car (either by pushing or towing) and engaging the transmission. The rolling energy travels through the engaged transmission to turn the engine over and (hopefully) starts the engine, without the aid of the starter drive.\n\nboth ways have their advantages and disadvantages, but boosting is safer and is less stressful on vehicle components overall if done properly.\n",
"\"Can someone clue me in on how exactly you would carry out each one though?\"\n\nJump starting- Attach the red and black cable clamps to the corresponding spots on the [battery](_URL_0_) of the dead car. Then attach the red clamp to the red spot on the car that you are using to jump the other car. Next, attach the black cable to the black spot on the battery of the car you are using to jump the other car. Let it charge for a minute and then try starting the car with the dead battery.\n\nPush starting: You hold the clutch in and get the car rolling, then you pop the clutch and it starts. Explanation as to why is covered by other posters."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.google.com/imgres?q=car+battery&hl=en&safe=active&sa=X&biw=1152&bih=661&tbm=isch&prmd=imvnsz&tbnid=H7Qciwj79Q7_yM:&imgrefurl=http://www.pepboys.com/parts/batteries/batteries/&docid=bAPSaFSGbUGGrM&imgurl=http://static.pepboys.com/images/uploads/batteries/CMS_comm_pic.jpg&w=263&h=211&ei=-51gUOzkHa6UigKs54DICA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=678&vpy=252&dur=4156&hovh=168&hovw=210&tx=102&ty=99&sig=106337647293737254369&page=1&tbnh=110&tbnw=141&start=0&ndsp=21&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0,i:91"
]
] |
|
6odvod | why is it that when we speak to a person eye to eye, we can only focus on one eye of the other person instead of both even though we have two eyes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6odvod/eli5_why_is_it_that_when_we_speak_to_a_person_eye/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkgn6hn"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"How easy is it to look at two things at once? I'm going to assume it's pretty hard for you (if you don't have a lazy eye, of course). Our eyes look in tandem at one \"point\" at a time typically. This is an aspect of our evolution that is helpful to perceive and visually track potential prey. Both of our eyes are on the front of our, versus a non-predatory animal such as a goat or chameleon (who's eyes can act independently). "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
dgyr35 | when someone is in jail being held on x amount of bond. if paid, where exactly does the money go, what are the conditions for the person that was in jail? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dgyr35/eli5_when_someone_is_in_jail_being_held_on_x/ | {
"a_id": [
"f3fxiqc",
"f3g052a",
"f3g10bd"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"K, so if you pay the full bond (without a bondsman) the money is held til their court date as a guarantee that they won't run from the law, upon sentence you get the bond back. If it's so much you get a bondsman, then the the 30% you put in is forfeit to the bondsman.",
"The bond is put in jail in your place. The concept is that you should be much more willing to go to court rather then having to forfeit your money if you flee. So when you do return to the court for your trial you get your bond money back. There is however an alternative if you can not get the money for the bond. You can borrow money from bondsmen to pay your bond. You only pay a small fee, typically 10% of the bond, and they will pay your bond and get their full amount back when you go to court. But they will keep the fee for themselves. If you do not show up for court they will have lost their money and they will literally hunt you down and drag you to court to get their bond money back.",
"Bail is the money paid by the defendant as a guarantee that the defendant will return for trial.\n\nIf the amount needed to secure release is more than the defendant can afford then the defendant can still be released by going through a bail bondsman. In that case the money is given to the court by a third party and is called a bond.\n\nIf you go through a bondsman you'll be expected to pay a premium upfront, usually 10% of the bond. Additionally, if a bond is high enough the bondsman may require that you secure the bond with collateral. (The court may also accept collateral directly from the defendant, such as a home. This is called a property bond.)\n\nIn either case, certain restrictions will usually be placed on the defendant while out on bail. These restrictions can include house arrest, instructions to not leave the jurisdiction, and instructions to avoid contact with certain people (such as those involved in the case, such as complainants or witnesses). Failure to abide by those restrictions can result in bail being revoked and the defendant being forced to await trial in jail.\n\nWhether the defendant pays bail or posts a bond, that money is held by the court until the terms of the bail are fulfilled. Usually this means until the defendant returns for trial (often bail is continued during the trial, and sometimes is continuing until sentencing) or until the charges are dropped. \n\nAt this point the bail/bond is returned to the payer."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7icjrs | history buffs; in light of pearl harbor, my question is: when did the us and japan become such close allies? at one point we declare war and now we are close. was there a single event/treaty/election? or was it a series of events? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7icjrs/elif_history_buffs_in_light_of_pearl_harbor_my/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqxryoe",
"dqxs09c",
"dqxs6fw"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
9
],
"text": [
"We required total surrender after WWII. We dismantled their military and took over their protection. We also provided a massive amount of money and materials to rebuild their cities and economy after the war. That is what made us close allies. ",
"Yeah, post-war we rebuilt them. We even wrote their constitution for them. Changed a lot, made them a democracy. Democracies tend to get along because it’s easier than war.",
"The warming of relations started pretty shortly after the war ended actually. Japanese Reconstruction started in 1945 and was led by General Douglas McArthur. During this time the U.S pushed for widespread Military, Economic, And social reform. We helped rebuild the cities that we destroyed and in return set up a more democratic diplomatic government. The economic policies and massive amount of money the U.S pumped into reconstruction lead to massive economic growth. The war resulted in mass destruction of japan and the reconstruction resulted in japans resurgence as a major player on the world stage. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1pyvqo | how the holy trinity works. which bit of it is god? if they're all god is christianity polytheistic? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pyvqo/eli5_how_the_holy_trinity_works_which_bit_of_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd7g115",
"cd7g942",
"cd7g9jf",
"cd7gdq3",
"cd7goea"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3,
2,
16
],
"text": [
"It really depends on the religion to which you are referring, some literally believe that they are One, others believe that they are one in purpose ",
"Christianity only has one God, that comes in three aspects, as I've been taught. (Protestant church)\r\rJesus is God incarnated. Jesus is God's way to communicate with us at more 'human level'. \r\rThe holy spirit is a more abstract thing and can perhaps best be described as 'the holy spirit', it's the non-physical part of God. It's love, it's what brings us together - solidarity, etc. \r\rVery basic explanation.",
"\"I am he as you are he as you are me as we are all together\"?\n\nOh wait, The Beatles are greater than God.",
"Water has three states: liquid, gas, and solid. The holy trinity can be thought of in similar terms.\n\nAlso, trying to explain calculus to a cat is not currently a possibility. The cat will just never understand. The same could be said about humans in certain respects.",
"This is a difficult concept which Christians admit cannot be fully understood by the human mind. First off, the Bible never uses the word \"Trinity.\" The doctrine of the Trinity was conceived to describe the relationship between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, it cannot be modeled mathematically. Christians believe that God is equally divided between God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. However, each is fully God. God the Son, for instance, is not one third of God, he is God in the entirety. But there is only one God, made up of the three equal parts, each of whom is fully God. Thus, it is not 1/3 + 1/3 +1/3 = 1 God. This concept is impossible to fully understand, however I will give you the best analogy I can. I am a brother, a boyfriend, and a son (that is to say, I have a brother, I have a girlfriend, and I have a father). I am independently fully brother, boyfriend, and son at the same time. I am not 1/3 of a brother, 1/3 of a boyfriend, and 1/3 of a son, I exist as all three fully and at once. This should answer your question about polytheism. Christians do not believe there are multiple Gods, but one God in three persons, each of whom are fully God. \n\nNow, to look at why Christians believe in such a division. Well, not all of them do. There are two schools of thought on this, the Unitarian view and the Trinitarian view, with the later being the most agreed upon. The Hebrew Bible uses many different words to describe God. One of the most popular is the word Adonai (this is the word generally translated to Lord). Adonai is actually a plural, which points to a multiperson Godhead. Furthermore, the word \"echad\" is used often in the Old Testament to describe God. Echad is word which implies unity or singularity, it is the opposite of \"yachid\" which implies division and is not used to describe the Godhead. So, there exists a linguistic derivation, God is described as plural but united at the same time. However, the most common defense comes from the New Testament's description of Jesus's baptism. Luke 3:22, for instance, says \" and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.” Here we see all three persons of the Godhead at once. The Father who is speaking to the Son (Jesus) as the Holy Spirit descends from Heaven. Thus we can assume that the Godhead is made up of three distinct entities. Moreover, God's actions and duties in the Bible can generally be evenly divided between the three. God the Father is the almighty ruler and creator, God the Son was incarnated and became the sacrifice by which all humans can be saved, and God the Holy Ghost represents the spirit or medium by which Christians can have a personal relationship with God. \nFinally, point of preference. While it is true that all three members of the Godhead are equivalent, an attempt at distinction should be made when possible. For instance, many Christians in the South like to use \"Jesus\" (the human incarnation of the Son) as a general name for God, e.g. accept Jesus into your heart, ask Jesus for, and in extreme cases, Jesus created the world. This is confusing and makes one seem like they don't know their theology. \n\nEdit: more information. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4c9dby | why do prey that vastly outnumber a predator, often flee instead of fight? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4c9dby/eli5_why_do_prey_that_vastly_outnumber_a_predator/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1g5a9e",
"d1g7ozo",
"d1g8222",
"d1gbnfn",
"d1gcc2c",
"d1gd04m",
"d1ged23",
"d1gfz5w",
"d1ggrql",
"d1gh1xf"
],
"score": [
120,
8,
13,
44,
2,
2,
2,
7,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"If the zebra attack the predators, they will probably win but the risk of injury is higher than running. When you run there's the chance that the lion won't be able to catch any zebra.\n\nNo individual zebra (or other herd animal) is going to put themselves in danger for the good of the herd as a whole. That kind of behaviour wouldn't evolve, because any zebra that ran while the rest of the herd fought the predators would be far more likely to live and have baby zebra that also run instead of fight. And before you know it, eventually the entire herd are fleeing instead of fighting.\n\nThat kind of self-sacrificial protective behaviour in animals only seems to exist in animals protecting their young. Many herd animals will circle their own young and fight predators who try to go for the young. In this instance, any adult that protects their young is more likely to have their young survive and grow up to pass on the genes for protecting young.\n\n > The lions will take down a single zebra and the 49 others will just stand and watch.\n\n[Herd animals will usually fight only if its their own young that is attacked](_URL_0_).",
"For this you have to look into some of the fundamentals of predator vs prey. Firstly, predators have undergone thousands of years of evolution to specialize in a manner of hunting desired prey. Also, keep in mind, in the animal kingdom, a cut is just as deadly as a bullet. Infections are seriously dangerous stuff. For this, even if it was 50 on 1, a good 500% extra zebras would probably get seriously wounded, and would more than likely die. So the optic becomes, do we run and leave one or two to die, or do we risk 5-7 dying long term? And suddenly running is easy",
"Prey animals are adapted for a different defense- breed more zebras than the lions kill.\n\nOther animals, like water buffalo, are much more defensive and absolutely will stand and fight, but individually a water buffalo is much larger and stronger than a zebra and armed with horns, so there is less individual risk.",
"Same reason humans run when there's a single guy shooting up a school/movie theater/whatever. Sure, they might take him down, but chances are some people are gonna take a few bullets. Nobody wants to be one of theose people.\n\n\nThere are some exceptions, of course (e.g. parents defending their children), but in the end, self-preservation usually wins out for most animals, including humans.",
"You're one zebra in 50, the lions come and attack a zebra slower than you. The other 48 zebras flee. What do you do.",
"From an evolutionary standpoint, the behavior stems from the length of time it takes to create more young, the location, and the difference in power between the predator and prey. \n\nCertain types of bees will crowd an intruder inside the hive and vibrate violently. The increase in heat will end up killing a few bees, but the attacking insect usually ends up dead. This is a plausible defense, as bees reproduce quickly, are backed into a corner, and must protect a queen to survive.\n\nHerd animals are not bound to these rules. Every animal has value in a reproductive manner. They commonly exist in wide open areas, and have similar running capacities as the predator. If the herd took a few casualties per attack, the time it takes to replace those animals is too long to justify sacrifice.",
"Buffaloes do that with certain frequency, when they counter attack you see the lions scattering all over the place.",
"By game theory, regardless of what the herd does, your chances of survival are highest by running, therefore you expect everyone to run. ",
"i suspect the same reason the majority of people will stand and watch an attack from one person on another in the street rather than intervene and risk injury to themselves, I guess it comes down to self preservation... better them than me type thinking",
"There is a really old joke that goes like this. Two hunters are in the wilds of Alaska when they are charged by a grizzly bear. They run for a bit, then one stops and takes off his heavy hunting boots. The other says, \"Man, what the hell is wrong with you? You can't outrun a bear.\"\n\nThe other man says, \"I know, but I can outrun you.\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.lazerhorse.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Lion-vs-Buffalo-Headbutt.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
b0qvfs | why do you not puke when you take fatal levels of caffeine? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b0qvfs/eli5_why_do_you_not_puke_when_you_take_fatal/ | {
"a_id": [
"eighp21",
"eign2bq"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Caffeine pills are made specifically to be rapidly absorbed into the bloodstream, by the time poisoning occurs there is nothing in the stomach to throw up.\nYou would however throw up if you ate or drank anywhere near toxic levels of a more slowly absorbed foodstuff.",
"I was a caffeine fiend in high school. when the levels get dangerously high you well start mild humiliations and will vomit. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
79r7zl | why do we perceive someone typing in all caps as yelling? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/79r7zl/eli5_why_do_we_perceive_someone_typing_in_all/ | {
"a_id": [
"dp45ljv",
"dp47a8q"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"As opposed to I'M ACTUALLY WHISPERING I'M JUST REALLY TALL?",
"It's conditioning. Typing in all caps to signify yelling is new. Someone had to tell you at one point that it was yelling, and not just lazy typing or a stuck caps lock."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3a03so | why does my dog follow me everywhere? | She is around 8 pounds, just over nine years old, and is a white female Maltese poodle.
She's sweet and well behaved. Docile and quiet. I just wonder why she likes to literally follow me anywhere I go. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3a03so/eli5_why_does_my_dog_follow_me_everywhere/ | {
"a_id": [
"cs82m8e",
"cs833zi"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"What else does she have to do? You're her main source of food, affection, and mental stimulation. Unless she has toys somewhere else in the house, there's nothing for her to do besides sleep and hang out with you. ",
"She wants attention. You might be the only other living creature she interacts with on a regular basis"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
u86cq | how is solar energy converted into electrical energy? | Edit: Sorry, I forgot to add the "ELI5" to the start of my title. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/u86cq/how_is_solar_energy_converted_into_electrical/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4t5mmu",
"c4t5x1u",
"c4t6pxl"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The, very basic, idea is that photons are absorbed by a semiconductor, which releases electrons in the material. Then there's an electric potential difference in the solar cell so the electrons move to correct it. This is the electrical energy we get. The type of material has a lot to do with how well this works. P-N junctions are an important part of this too, but it's been too long since I studied them to be able to explain them well.",
"Solar panels are basically huge, super-thin diodes. Literally. They are a thin layer of P type silicon sandwiched together with a thin layer of N type silicon.\n\nThe normal function of a diode is to only allow electrons to flow one direction. Electrons can move from the N type silicon to the P type silicon. But once across the border, they cannot move back. However, there is a price to pay for this one-way behavior. The price is that it takes some energy to push electrons across the border in the allowed direction.\n\nIn a normal electrical circuit, the voltage from the battery that powers the circuit is what gives the electrons the energy to jump the border and move through the diode.\n\nIn a solar cell, however, it is incoming photons of light that give the electrons the energy to \"jump over the band gap\" and move from one type of silicon to the other. The way this works is that a photon of light comes in and hits an electron flying around one of the silicon atoms. Kind of like a bullet hitting a bowling ball, and starting the ball rolling. Some of the electrons will get enough energy from being hit by a photon to jump from the N type to the P type silicon, and when they do, they become electrical current that can flow out of the solar cell.",
"In my kitchen I have this bar ledge that lets me look out over the living room. Sometimes I like to have a beer or 2 and some bottles will make there way out onto that ledge. So now I have a bunch of bottles up on that ledge and I've got this ball around. So I get this stupid idea. I get the ball, and I throw it at the bottles, trying to knock them off. They're really easy to knock off because they're just idly sitting there.\n\nNow imagine that those bottles are electrons, the ball is a photon, and the ledge is certain materials. For most materials you can imagine that there's glue on the ledge, so the bottles don't come off easily, but for some very specific materials the ledge is smooth granite, making the bottles very easy to knock off."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1mw51i | how fast does new fat form after you've eaten a big meal? | For example, after overloading on Thanksgiving dinner, when will you be heavier due to new/more fat, not just undigested food in your belly? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mw51i/eli5how_fast_does_new_fat_form_after_youve_eaten/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccd7huy",
"ccd7lrh",
"ccd7s19",
"ccd8tog",
"ccd9gdj",
"ccdah1n",
"ccdanhe",
"ccdbvvp",
"ccdfg0q",
"ccdl2uy"
],
"score": [
317,
2,
8,
17,
465,
11,
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A high fatty meal takes roughly 5-6 hours to digest. This is due to fats being lipids and bile being required to process them. This limits how much digestive enzyme can work on it at a time, therefor making it much slower then high carb meals (45m -2h). Now, as far as new fat being formed, this will be under the influence of a large number of factors. Firstly, the higher your energy demand, the more likely cells will uptake the fatty acids you just processed for energy. Next, genetics, genetics, genetics. Next how well trained you are athletically influences location of fat storage as well as muscle's access to said storage. Once energy needs are supplied, resting muscle's preferred energy source are free fatty acids, then excess will be up taken by adipose cells for storage. These cells will expand to take in the remaining fat. You don't make new fat cells per say, more like your current ones expand. However any energy nutrient will eventually be converted to fat if consumed beyond energy needs; carbs/protiens after following similar pathways to be converted to excess acetyl-CoA which then turns on fat synthesis.\n\nHope that answers your question and is not written too technically. \n\nSource: I'm a exercise physiologist, Certified Personal trainer, and minored in nutrition. ",
"I don't fully know how to answer your question, but I know that it doesn't become fat until after you've eaten more calories than you've burned. Every one has a BMR, or basal metabolic rate of burning calories. This is the amount of calories your body burns just to keep you alive, if you just lay down and do absolutely nothing. Depending on your weight, height, biology, etc, people will burn anywhere from ~1400-2000 calories (could be different, but these are the most common I've seen). For example, mine is about 1500. If I do nothing, I can eat 1500 calories a day and not lose or gain weight. I will form no fat.\n\nHowever, in actuality in the run of a day I burn closer to 1800-2000 calories, or more if I actually exercise. So I can eat roughly 1800 calories a day while keeping the same amount of fat.\n\nSO, no fat will form if you don't eat over your BMR every day. Your body will use all of the calories as energy, and you'll stay at your regular weight. If you're weight training, you will gain muscle and weight, all while also not forming fat.\n\nAs for your question, I would imagine it's pretty quickly, I just don't know the actual time. Could be hours, could be a couple days. It would take probably just a bit longer than however long it takes for the BMR amount of calories to burn off? If you eat 2000 calories, but burn 1800, the 200 gets stored as fat after the 1800 has been burned. But if the next day you continue to burn more and eat less, it might never become fat becuase you've successfully burned that other 200 throughout the night/next day.",
"It's extremely unlikely that you'll actually gain any permanent weight whatsoever from a single meal, no matter how big. Gaining weight is a long-term thing, whether it be through months (the \"holiday season\" maybe) or years of bad habits, or forceful weight gain in a bodybuilding/powerlifting/strength sport situation.\n\nTo store fat your body has to create fat cells, which are then filled up with actual fat. This isn't an instant process - your body needs to adapt to new inputs. This is also why people who've been on shitty diets can gain weight back very quickly - killing fat cells is much harder than creating them, and they therefore still have that extra potential for fat-gain. You can empty the the fat cells and lose weight, but a lot of the fat cells will still exist.\n\nTo answer your question at it's most basic: excess food that your body isn't used to will pretty much stay undigested - you'll literally just shit it out. Another thing to take into account, is that depending on what you eat, you may be carrying excess water weight - if your meal was full of salt and carbs, you'll naturally carry more water in your muscle cells (and probably other types). When i was training for powerlifting, my weight would easily fluctuate by as much as 5lb per day purely depending on what sort of meals i'd had. The simple term for this is 'bloat'.\n\nSource: used to be into powerlifting, gained 80lb, read a few good diet books, looking to become a personal trainer/strength coach at some point. Not a nutritional scientist by any means - i'm sure one may be able to clarify/correct some of the points i've made.\n\n",
"Whatever happened to questions getting answered in this sub reddit in a simple manner? ",
"I'll answer your original question...\n\n12-24 hours and you'll have stored the excess calories as fat. Depending on the source of those calories (sugars are processed fast, then things like complex carbs and protein take longer with fat taking the longest to digest) the amount of time it take for your body to break down the nutrients differs. If you consume enough calories to gain weight (which would be impressive in one meal. It takes 3500 excess calories to gain 1 lb) you'll see the weight gain on the scale by the same time the next day. \n\nI can go into more depth later if you would like.\n\nSource- double majored in Exercise Science and Nutrition for undergrad and am working on my masters in nutrition right now. I should actually be reading now...\n\nEdit-since this post is at the top here are some helpful nutrition links.\n[Nutrition Data website](_URL_1_)\n[Journal of the International Society on Sports Nutrition](_URL_2_)\n[AMA with Gary Taubes on sugar](_URL_0_)\n",
"Keep in mind eating a very large meal will cause a significant weight gain in a 24 hour period, but don't think any of that is fat. Say you binge eat a whole pizza or a chinese buffet. Almost all of that weight is water retention from the excess carbs and more so the high amount of sodium consumed. Also with a very large meals comes lots of poop. Poop makes you hold more water and is mostly water itself. Water is heavy. I can gain 5-10lb after a cheat day but about 2 days after I am back at my original weight. \n\n\nFat is accumulated over time. Most weight gained after a cheat meal is water and will be excreted within 12-24 hours. Also poop.",
"What happens when you have liposuction? If you remove a large number of fat cells from your love handles, does that mean that the remaining fat cells in other parts of your body are more likely to absorb fat, I.e. Harder for your love handles to come back? Or does your body produce more fat cells from the same place they were removed?",
"any food such as carbohydrate, protein or fats can potentially end up as fat. \n\nBut humans don't tend to make fat out of protein and carbohydrate unless they are overeating. Excess protein will become carbohydrate. Carbohydrate first replenishes liver and muscle glycogen, once that is full then lipogenesis will proceed in the liver. How long that takes to begin depends on the state of the glycogen stores, requirement for protein, activity etc.\n\nIf you are just interested in fat:\n\nfrom a normal sized meal - after 8 hours a healthy non-smoker should have cleared all the fat from the blood and it would be mostly stored in fat cells. \n\nsource: _URL_0_\n\n\n\n",
"This might be a better question for /r/askscience",
"I would agree with most of the post previously but after watching 'Sugar: The Bitter Truth' it changed my views drastically.\n\nOne point in particular where I know I have eaten an excessive amount over my DRI in calories, yet, have no apparent gain weight. \n\nAnyone else realize that you need to run almost 5 KM's to burn off a 400 cal muffin? Yet, you can keep the weight off including the snickers bar you had for lunch with a 15 minute jog.\n\nThe doco' suggest that when you exercise, you reduce a chemical in your liver that's required to convert certain sugars into fat. So by exercising regularly, you essentially prevent the formation of fat to a degree. Instead the sugar's get converted into a stored from for later use.\n\nThe math of Calorie in vs Calorie out never really made sense to me, as countless of times when I would train regularly, I knew I could eat anything and still not gain the weight. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/12edbj/im_gary_taubes_science_writer_and_author_of_sweet/",
"http://nutritiondata.self.com/",
"http://www.jissn.com/mostforwarded/alltime?page=1&itemsPerPage=25&citation=true&summary=false"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://atvb.ahajournals.org/content/17/10/2096.long"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
2xsr01 | why were the documented acts of religious figures deemed miracles and not witchcraft back in the day? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2xsr01/eli5_why_were_the_documented_acts_of_religious/ | {
"a_id": [
"cp30tcb",
"cp31o86",
"cp334ia"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Generally, cultures that believe in the supernatural divide things up based on whether supernatural events are compatible with societal values or not, rather than banning them outright. Religious leaders to whom such things are attributed are working within customary norms, so their achievements are not perceived as witchcraft.",
"When OUR guy does it, it's a miracle. When THEIR guy does it, it's witchcraft. Simple as that.\n\nBut as to \"documented acts,\" outside of religious texts, there are no credible accounts of actual miracles. It's either straight-up myth, or people interpreting unusual but entirely natural phenomena as miracles.\n\n",
"Perspective. A person who believes that someone's divine power is good will believe that that person will perform miracles. A person who believes that someone's supernatural power is bad will believe that that person performs witchcraft.\n\nFor example, in the Bible, some of the Jews believed that Jesus was the Messiah because he cast out demons, while other Jews believed that his power to cast out demons was from Satan. Same act, different interpretations."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
oqd02 | how come i still can't hear much the day after a concert | It's been explained to me before like something about vibrations in the bones, but if someone could just explain it that would be awesome! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/oqd02/eli5_how_come_i_still_cant_hear_much_the_day/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3j743c"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Basically inside the cochlea of your ear there are tiny hairs called Stereocilia. When a sound enters your ear it enters the cochlea and vibrates the little hairs, the movement of these little hairs is turned into electrical signals and sent to the brain.\n\nNow these hairs are tiny, more than half as think as the hair on your head. Very loud sounds can physically break these hairs, which stops your hearing from working. Sometimes you'll also hear a \"ringing\" in your ears, this is the broken hairs mistakenly signalling to the brain that they're receiving a signal because of the way they are broken.\n\nUsually if its concert-level sound the hair will not be totally broken and will somewhat repair itself over the next few days, and your hearing will return. However repeated exposure to loud noises like that can eventually leave your hairs damaged beyond repair, they'll die and never be replaced.\n\nMany older rock artists have totally lost their hearing, it can be a big problem. If you're going somewhere that the music is so loud you can't hear afterwards you really should consider wearing ear-plugs to help protect your ears. You can even get special \"Musicians\" ear plugs which are designed to dampen sound equally across all frequencies, thus not altering the sound of music, just the loudness."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
7j9vkt | how can something like ready player one exist without being sued for copyright by basically everyone? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7j9vkt/eli5_how_can_something_like_ready_player_one/ | {
"a_id": [
"dr4ost2",
"dr4oupc"
],
"score": [
11,
5
],
"text": [
"They got permission from the property holders to use those properties in the movie. Wether they paid to use them or if they were just given permission though. Who knows?",
"They go to each of the IP holders and ask them for an agreement to use their characters. Large corporations are generally pretty interested in having their characters show up in a major motion picture by Steven Spielberg."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
48llj9 | what was the outcome of super tuesday and what does it mean? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/48llj9/eli5_what_was_the_outcome_of_super_tuesday_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0kl9aw",
"d0kntgp"
],
"score": [
32,
2
],
"text": [
"First the Democratic Party and the Republican Party hold primary election to see who should be the party nominee. Then there is a general election where those two nominees fight each other to become president.\n\nPrimaries are held on different dates in different states. The general elections are all held on one day. This changes the importance of the primary elections based on how early they are held. \n\nSay 100 people are watching a movie for the first time. You want to see how many people like the movie. If you have everyone write yes or no on a card and count the yeses, you'll see how many people like it right away. If 90/100 said yes, then the film gets a 90%. This is like how Rotten Tomatoes works. This is also how the general election works.\n\nBut say you screen the movie for 100 people, but people leave the theater at different times. First, only one person comes out. If they say they like the movie, the film gets 1/1 aka 100%. If they say they don't like the movie, then the film gets a 0/1 aka 0%. There are still 99 people left inside, but unless the first guy was a fluke, the rest of the people are likely to agree. Then 10 minutes later, another guy comes out. They say whether they like the movie. Then 10 minutes later 2 people come out. As more people exit, you get a bigger sample size and learn more. \n\nThen say 10 people come out. This is a bigger group. If 9/10 say they like it, it's less likely to be a fluke. It's more likely that the film will get closer to 100 votes at the end rather than 0 votes. If only 1/10 of them likes it, then it's more likely that the other people still inside hate it too.\n\nPlus, imagine if the people who haven't decided whether they like the movie can hear what people outside already said. If the first 15 people like the movie, they feel more obligated to say they like it too.\n\nThe primaries are like this. First was Iowa, then a week later, New Hampshire, then Nevada and South Carolina, then 12 states. Once you have results from 16/50 states, you can guess that the other states will follow the same pattern.\n\nPlus, the results influence what people think. If one candidate wins in 11/16 states, they are likely to be the most popular overall, and people are more likely to rally around them. Furthermore, the less popular politicians will drop out leaving more people looking for a new person to support.\n\nAnyways, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton won Super Tuesday. They won the most states and the most delegates (which is a way of weighting the states based on how many people live there.) If Trump and Clinton keep winning by the same amount in the rest of the states, they'll win their party's nomination.\n\nThe only way this can change is in one of two ways. First, the early states are different than the later states. If a bunch of frat boys see a romantic comedy, don't like it, and leave early, they might say that the movie isn't good, but they aren't representative of the rest of the viewers. This isn't the case with primaries. Most of them are very similar to the later states. The other way is if some thing happens in the time between when the first states vote and the later states vote. Maybe Trump says something that angers his voters. Maybe Bernie Sander's supporters work really hard at the phones and convince Hillary supporters to switch. \n\nThis is a really long analogy, but I'll add in another simple one. Say you have a kid. They go to school and get a 2.0 GPA. It's possible that the first semester was a fluke. It's also possible that they will work hard and improve their GPA later on. But it's most likely that they are simply a C student and will continue to average C's in future classes.",
"US primary elections are, to a great extent, about momentum. Bernie Sanders went into super tuesday with a lot of momentum from some surprise wins (or near losses) in the early states but has, thanks to yesterday, lost that.\n\nCombined with Hillary Clinton's lead in super-delegates (who are party members who can vote however they like regardless of the votes) it would now be extremely difficult for Sanders to swing the election to him.... Absent a significant, substantive, event such as Hillary Clinton being charged with a crime, or committing sme kind of terrible, terrible, political mistake.\n\nOn the Republican side things get a little more interesting. Trump was the big winner of the night, no question about that, and it is starting to look like the delegate math will make him hard to beat (but it isn't a done race yet). The real question however is what the other republican candidates do. If the other candidates drop out of the race and throw their support behind one unified figure, and only a small slice of republican voters have Trump as their second choice candidate, then we have a horse race. If two or more of them stick it out, Trump becomes the favorite by a wide margin.\n\nTrump does however have some issues as a candidate. It is still possible he will self implode (in a way I don't think Hillary will). It is possible he will have something scandalous leaked about him (and to be honest I find it hard to imagine that Trump doesn't have some major skeletons in his closet). Just because of those concerns I downgrade Trump's chances much more than I would any other candidate who was in the same position as Trump at this point in the election."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3eqpnl | why do these certain ethnicities tend to own a majority of these certain businesses? | * Vietnamese - Nail Salons
* Mexicans - Landscaping
* Koreans - Dry Cleaning
* Indian/Various African ethnicitys/Middle Eastern people - Taxis/Gas Stations
* Domincans - Hair Salons
I'm sure there are some I'm forgetting and please comment if can think of more. Also, I know this is all super stereotypical and definitely does not apply to all but I'm just wondering *what is it about these certain groups that drew them into this certain craft, besides it being common or in the family? What's the history?* Like for example what's the history behind many Vietnamese doing nails, etc.
Sorry in advance if I'm coming off racist lol.
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3eqpnl/eli5why_do_these_certain_ethnicities_tend_to_own/ | {
"a_id": [
"cthhz8t",
"cthi2e4",
"cthi3gh",
"cthj4vm"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Imagine moving to a new country, you are going to stay with relatives or friends of relatives. They give a job at their business and then teach you the ropes. You now know \"insert business name here\" so you then start your own. If you go back far enough there may have social stigma around a job or around the ethnic group doing a job. \n\nCheck out [The Search For General Tsos Chicken](_URL_0_). They go into detail why Chinese immigrants went into dry cleaning and restaurants.",
"TL;DR at the bottom.\n\nThere is an awesome academic study I once read that I unfortunately could not find after much searching that basically looked at major immigration groups in the U.S. and found that even in those with giant populations (i.e. Irish-American, Italian-American) they almost all came from 6-7 old families. That is to say, that if you picked a random Italian-American from Chicago and then another from NYC they would have a higher probability of sharing a somewhat recent common ancestor (in Italy) than if you did the same thing with an Italian in Italy. \n\nAnyways, that's somewhat offtopic but there was a small section that correlated that to these working stereotypes. Basically the general gist of it say if you can imagine the first couple Korean families show up and happen to open a dry cleaner totally random in the 1950's. He writes home and tells how he opened up a dry cleaner business to his family. The son of that family mentions this to his cousin who tells HIS wife's husband about it. That guy then says \"man I'm bored of Korea, I should try that\", and gets in touch with the original Korean-American guy about how to set it up. Now there is 2 Korean dry cleaners. This process sort of repeats over and over for decades and by the end you have a ton of Korean dry cleaners who although nominally strangers probably had some older relative/ancestor or even family friend in common who basically gave them the idea or the run down of how to do it. \n\nI know the article specifically discussed the \"Patel Cartel\" phenomenon and this was the basic gist of it, but I'm making a presumption that it probably played out similarly among other cultures.\n\nRegarding Mexicans and Dominicans however, I can add some more personal anecdote. Mexicans because it's pretty decent paying work that almost all Mexicans from rural areas will be familiar with. Dominicans are far and away some of the best barbers on Earth. Most Dominicans I know take hair and haircuts super serious. It was pretty normal where I went to high school (~90% Dominican Americans) to aspire to be a barber, and barbers were legit looked up to. Saying your kid was a barber at a reputable hair joint was like the equivalent of the Jewish mom talking about her Doctor son. Don't really know if I'm explaining it well and I understand it sounds bizarre to other people but the ability to cut hair well was considered very impressive at least in my personal Dominican-American community. To this day I notice things about peoples' haircuts subconsciously that nobody else would take note of and I'm not even Dominican. \n\nTL;DR - Almost all people from those immigrant groups are loosely related either via being descended from a similar region of the \"old country\" or direct family ties. As such the first \"pioneers\" from their families or regions in the old country played a big role in encouraging newer immigrants to take up the same trades and were able to assist them in setting up their businesses which made assimilation a bit easier.",
"An immigrant group comes in, and they do what they do to survive. Some of them get beyond survival and make bank, and stay in the business (even if they have 'better' opportunities). That's the origin of the stereotype\n\nThere may be other factors at play. An immigrant moves to a new country. almost instinctively, they will seek the company of their own compatriots (people who understand them in a strange land, mutual support network, that sort of thing). They may get work through these connections. This can reinforce the stereotype\n\nI hope this goes some way to answer your question ",
"In the case of nail salons in the USA, [the amazing true story](_URL_0_) is that it all started when a random group of 20 Vietnamese immigrants happened to meet a woman who got them into that business. Then they taught it to other Vietnamese immigrants and it spread."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.thesearchforgeneraltso.com/"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.refinery29.com/2014/07/71245/vietnamese-american-nail-industry-documentary"
]
] |
|
4tflus | why are most cooking oils ~120 calories per tbsp? | Looking at the nutritional information of all of the cooking oils I have (Vegetable, Canola, Peanut, Olive, Coconut, etc.), they all seem to be in the range of 120-130 calories per tablespoon. Is there a (possibly obvious that I'm completely overlooking) reason for this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4tflus/eli5why_are_most_cooking_oils_120_calories_per/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5gv5zg",
"d5gv9sb",
"d5gw875"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"They're all fats. Fat has 9 kcal/g. There are about 13-14 g of oil in a tbsp. 13-14 g * 9 kcal = 117-126 kcal/tbsp.",
"On a calorie level all oils are the same. Specifically all oils are 100% fat. \nA gram of fat has 9 calories in it. \nA tablespoon of oil weights about 14g. \n14 * 9 = 126",
"1g of fat = 9 calories\n\n1g of protein = 4 calories\n\n1g of carb = 4 calories\n\nOil is 100% fat, it just comes from various places (peanuts, coconuts, olives, etc). 1tbsp of oil weighs about 14g, give or take.\n\nSimple math:\n(9 calories per gram) x (14 grams) = 126 calories"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6y6iup | spoons and fork seem more efficient than chopsticks in almost every way, then why do people still use chopsticks? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6y6iup/eli5_spoons_and_fork_seem_more_efficient_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"dml0q5s"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"They aren't more efficient in some respects.\n\nPlus they are *way* cheaper than forks or spoons since they are just two sticks. No need for tines or a flattened rounded spoon-end."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3yb4ht | the suffixes after names in japanese (e.g. -chan, -kun, -san) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3yb4ht/eli5_the_suffixes_after_names_in_japanese_eg_chan/ | {
"a_id": [
"cybytli",
"cyc3xjt",
"cyc65qr",
"cycbnft"
],
"score": [
115,
17,
32,
3
],
"text": [
"-chan is for when you call someone cute, or younger people.\n\n-kun is for friends, your buddies.\n\n-san is for adults and general people you want to adress politely\n\nIt's only used when addressing someone directly, not for yourself. It's basically just a way of indicating your relation to the person.",
"Haven't heard it in a while but what does -tan mean?",
"_URL_0_\n\n***Tried to put in simple layman/eli5 terms:***\n\nsan- Respectful version similar to Mr, Mrs, or Miss.\n\nsama - person considered of higher ranking or more respectable use than san. Can also be used for guests or customers. \n\nkun - someone of a senior status refering to someone of junior. So a sama speaking to someone lower. Also used for peers such as friends or fellow same levels workers.\n\nchan - someone who is younger/cute. Can be used for little kids or older people.\n\nbo - chan for male babies\n\nsenpai/kohai - senpai referring to higher grade/skill in school, dojo, or sport club. A team captain could be referred to as senpai. A kohai is a peer or someone lower than you. So in a school compared to adults sama=senpai and kun=kohai.\n\nsensei/hakase - sensei refers to teachers, doctors, politicians, lawyers, and other authority figures. A title to someone who has gained mastery of something. Hakase (little hard to understand) seems to refer more to someone of academic standing as a professor.\n\nshi - speaking to an unknown person. Similar to \"to whom it may concern\". Usually seen in newspapers or publications.",
"Well, first of all, it must be mentioned that not using an honorific is intimate and familiar, or casual. It goes something like; Tendo-san, Akane-san, Akane-kun/chan, Akane; in order of closeness. I will use characters from Ranma 1/2 as examples.\n\n* -san is default politeness, can be used with last or first name. Ryouga uses Akane-san because -chan would imply they're friends while Ranma uses Kasumi-san to be polite and calls almost everyone else plainly.\n* -kun/-chan First name only. These are of the same level of closeness, with chan being for girls/cute and kun being for boys. Also commonly used for younger people. Kasumi uses Ranma-kun because she speaks properly while Genma and Kuno use Akane-kun despite her being a girl because they respect her as a martial artist.\n* -sama is formal for someone in an elevated position, Kodachi always uses Ranma-sama to show her devotion, even as she blackmails and/or kidnaps him.\n* -dono is a more distant version of sama, like two samurai generals referring to each other.\n* -sempai is someone more senior, like someone in a higher grade or has been working longer. Kouhai is the younger version, but not used that way. It would be A-sempai and B-kun, with B-kun the kouhai(junoir).\n* -sensei roughly means respected teacher, can be used for doctors or even a professional like a manga artist.\n* -shishou is like an elevated version of sensei, as in apprentice and master relationship.\n\nSome examples:\n\n* Ranma: Akane (they're engaged), Ryouga (punching bag), Kasumi-san (polite housewife)\n* Akane: Ranma (still engaged), Ryouga-kun(nice guy), Kasumi-neechan(sweet older sister)\n* Kasumi: Ranma-kun, Akane-chan, Ryouga-kun (Ara, they're playing together again. So energetic.)\n* Ryouga: Kasumi-san, Akane-san, Ranma (Die you bastard!)\n\nWorkplace: Coworker-kun, Manager-san, President-sama, Other Company's President-dono."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_honorifics"
],
[]
] |
||
3u4yhj | why can't you drink and take sleeping pills? it seems like they'd go great together. | I know and have read the warnings, but i want the watered down science! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3u4yhj/eli5_why_cant_you_drink_and_take_sleeping_pills/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxbxkf5",
"cxby3lc"
],
"score": [
6,
7
],
"text": [
"The concern here is likely over effectiveness. Alcohol makes you rather slow and drowsy, and so does the sleeping meds. Together, there's a risk that they'll work together in a far stronger manor than you'd expect. \n\nToo much of this kind of effect on your body, and you might quit breathing, choke in your own vomit, injure yourself, etc...",
"Alcohol is a depressant, which slows activity of the brain/central nervous system. This effect compounds with sleeping pills and so your body can easily slow down too far, resulting in generally dangerous stuff."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1ut7hb | why do ultrasounds heal injuries? | My physiotherapist applied ultrasounds to my articulation, is it really doing something? how does it work?
Thanks and sorry for my bad english. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ut7hb/eli5_why_do_ultrasounds_heal_injuries/ | {
"a_id": [
"celh9js"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"As I understand it there is not much research done on this. However, it could work due to increased circulation in the area where it's applied.."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5qu94b | how are events (like the grammys) supposedly "live" when they are showing us footage from the event in commercials? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5qu94b/eli5_how_are_events_like_the_grammys_supposedly/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd24t0k"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They're showing footage from *past* Grammys in the commercials. Though the real event isn't *quite* live. There's a slight delay so that the network can beep out inappropriate language."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
18yjhq | if .wav and .flac are both lossless, and also both mega-huge files, why bother with flac? | OSes/audio players are more likely to be able to play .wavs with out a codec than .flac, so isn't .flac unnecessary? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18yjhq/eli5_if_wav_and_flac_are_both_lossless_and_also/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8j4jb1",
"c8j4jjj",
"c8j4jtf",
"c8j4xtd"
],
"score": [
10,
2,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Flac files are quite a bit more compact than wav files. \n\nWav is uncompressed.\n\nFlac is compressed, but lossless, which means it compresses in a way that reduces file size but not quality, unlike a compressed *lossy* format like MP3 that reduces file size and quality.\n\nAs I recall, a FLAC file is roughly half the size of the equivalent Wav file and the same quality, whereas a MP3 is roughly a tenth of the size of the Wav, but loses some quality. That's just a rule of thumb, and probably outdated, though.",
"flacs are compressed, so they ought to take up less space then the .wav they were made from.",
".flac is much smaller than .wav. Usually around half the size, if I recall.",
"FLAC files are compressed and therefore take up less space on your hard disk, media player or phone. FLAC files are typically half the size of their WAV equivalent. Unlike MP3 they use a lossless form of compression that doesn't lose audio fidelity. \n\nFLAC files have better support for metadata than WAV. Metadata includes information about the song such as title, artist, album, etc.\n\nIt is a shame that more devices don't support FLAC, but it is an open format so hopefully more manufacturers will support it soon."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3vnf21 | when my laptop is on and i put my hand on the lid i don't feel anything as long as i don't move my hand. as soon as i move it along the lid i feel a buzzing. why is this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vnf21/eli5_when_my_laptop_is_on_and_i_put_my_hand_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxp1jmg",
"cxp1oqz",
"cxp5gx4"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm guessing this is a brushed silver macbook, because the same thing happens with mine. Turn it off, and you'll find it still happens, because the \"buzzing\" is from the friction of your hand rubbing across the surface, not from the computer itself. Basically it feels smooth, but you're causing a low vibration when you run your hand over it. ",
"Does it happen only when it's plugged in ? In that case you might have an earthing problem",
"This happens on metal parts of the housing of your laptop. I have an Acer which has some aluminum and I get the same feeling. It's not mere friction, it happens when your device is not properly grounded (earthed). The housing becomes electrically charged and will discharge through your finger, what you are feeling are electrical arcs. I'm no physicist so I'm sure someone could elaborate/correct, but I believe this is the general phenomenon."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1w7yuk | why is urban density important and how does it work? | I live in the city of Calgary which apparently has very low levels or urban density, and the current mayor has put a lot of emphasis on increasing density. Why is this important? What is urban density? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1w7yuk/eli5_why_is_urban_density_important_and_how_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"cezipz6",
"cezjb9h"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Until the 19th century, city transportation was either by foot or by animal. This meant that people had to live very close to where they worked. For lots of people to do that, it was necessary for large numbers of people to live in a small area, generally by making taller buildings with smaller living spaces. That's all high density is: lots of people in a small area.\n\nThings began to change, first with trains and electric streetcars. People could live further from their jobs and commute in, so houses were built further from the city. As automobiles became cheap and common, cities began to be surrounded by more low-density neighborhoods, bigger houses with larger lawns. This happened especially dramatically in the warmer parts of the U.S. with the advent of air conditioning; formerly medium-sized cities like Los Angeles, Atlanta, Dallas, and Houston added many miles of suburbs in a fairly short period of time.\n\nLow density has two big advantages. Living is generally cheap compared to city centers, and people can have lots of room for their money. Unfortunately, low density is not very efficient. Public transportation becomes very difficult to run effectively when only a handful of people can walk to each stop. Cars become necessary for even short trips to the grocery store. (Also, if you want to get drunk at a bar and come home, you need a cab or a sober friend.) Traffic gets very bad very quickly, and no amount of road construction can fix it.\n\nMany cities are trying to increase density, partly because many people have become tired of traffic and long commutes by car, and want to be able to walk to bars and restaurants at night. None of these are very practical in low-density suburbs, but all are pretty easy in higher-density cities.",
"Urban density is basically how many people there are per square mile. Think of it as \"urban crowdedness\" if that helps it make sense.\n\nEconomics are a large part of why high urban density would be important for city planners and politicians. More residences and businesses mean more people and companies feeding tax dollars into the city. It's a double edged sword for some small business owners, because there are more potential customers in the area, but the increase in customer base means that it might make it financially worthwhile for big businesses to invest in the area and open up new locations, driving some smaller companies out of business.\n\nFrom an administrative standpoint, increased urban density simplifies managing the city's need in many (but not all) ways. Say, for example, that one ambulance runs at 100% of capacity when serving 10,000 people. If the area those 10,000 people occupy shrinks (by the density increasing), the that ambulance's response times should shorten because of the shorter distances it has to travel. There are two benefits here: that same ambulance can now service more people than before, increasing its efficiency, and the shorter response times mean a small uptick in public health. This example works in other sectors too, from police and fire to education and public transport.\n\nThe hope in all of this is that as different aspects of the city get better in small amounts across the board, that property values start to rise. This in turn should attract wealthier residents and businesses, which increase tax revenue, and the whole cycle repeats again.\n\nOf course, it can go horribly wrong. Urban sprawl can lead to misallocation of funds, neighborhoods being neglected, and poor minorities being forced to the outskirts of the city because they can't afford to live in the now more affluent and costly city centers. Chicago is a prime example of this. The Loop in downtown and the North Side have excellent public transport accessibility, beaches, world-class museums, phenomenal restaurants, and tons of nightlife. Go 10 minutes south or west of the Loop to where all the minorities have been pushed to and they are areas that you absolutely would not want to be lost in at night. Hell, you don't even want to be there during the day.\n\n**tl;dr** - Urban density is how many people you have packed into an area. The benefit of increasing this is more tax revenue which should lead to an increase in tax revenue and attract wealthier residents and businesses. However, the increase in wealth in one part of the city often displaces poorer minorities that can't afford the increases in living expenses."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3g8ovm | company valuation vs. revenue | How can facebook be worth 100+ billion dollars, yet it only makes about 1+ billion dollars a year?
Note: I'm using arbitrary numbers.
Edit: Not just facebook but most companies seem to have a much higher net worth compared to it's revenue. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3g8ovm/eli5company_valuation_vs_revenue/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctvwj04"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"According to Wikipedia, Facebook's revenue last year was actually a little over $12 billion and they have total assets of over $40 billion with a total equity of $38 billion. When were talking about the total value of a company, though, we are looking at more than just their revenue and tangible assets. Investors will surely take these things into account and they are important indicators, but there are also intangible assets like the value of their brand and the recognition it has, and things like future expected revenues to consider. At the end of the day a company is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it, and in the case of a public company like Facebook it becomes easier to determine that by looking at the total value of its stock. If you take the current trading price of a company's stock, and multiply it by the number of outstanding shares of stock, you get a good idea of what the company is worth. This is called market capitalization or market cap for short. Currently Facebook's market cap is around $265 billion. The simple answer to your question is that it is worth what people are currently willing to pay for it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
57xpq4 | why does looking at a reversed image of yourself look so weird? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/57xpq4/eli5_why_does_looking_at_a_reversed_image_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8vul13"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Firstly your brain is incredibly sensitive at picking up very very subtle facial differences. Our faces are not perfectly symmetrical so a picture of your face is not the same as a mirrored image.\n\n\n\nThe other point is, when you see a photo that is 'reversed', it's actually the other way around. \n\nYou normally see yourself as a reflection such as in a mirror. This image is actually the reversed or \"mirrored\" image, not the photo.\n\n\nIf you look at yourself in a mirror and look at your left ear, and touch your left ear, you will see a hand move on the left side of the mirror.\n\n\nNow if you stand in front of someone both looking at each other face on, now ask them to touch their left ear with their left hand. This time whilst you'll see they move their left hand but that motion is taking place on YOUR right side. (I.e. their left hand is on the same side where your right hand is.).\n\n\nThis is the trick, everyone sees you the other way around. \n\nIt's only you who sees yourself constantly mirrored and thinks this is the normal 'you'. This is why when you skype/facetime they will mirror your image to show on your phone so you see what you're used to. On the other persons phone seeing the image of you, they see the non-mirrored image which looks normal to them but weird to you.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2ysan2 | why are girl scouts and boy scouts gender segregated? | Edit: in the US. It seems that other countries aren't so strict in segregation in similar organizations. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ysan2/eli5_why_are_girl_scouts_and_boy_scouts_gender/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpcg5y5",
"cpci160",
"cpcrbjc",
"cpcsd2o",
"cpcsiqi",
"cpd9e5m"
],
"score": [
33,
6,
12,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Girl Guides. \n\nBut they aren't, at least not any more. Girls can and do freely join Scouting bodies that were previously devoted exclusively to boys.\n\nThe reason for the segregation was because boy scouts was created very early in the 1900's by Robert Baden-Powell as a very traditional organization in a time when women had a different expected homemaker role. So the boys got to do cool stuff like woodland survival and the girls concentrated a bit more in in-house stuff like sewing and cooking.\n\nAlthough this has dramatically changed, you still see some of this in the selected activities where the Scouts do more adventuresome stuff than the Guides. So more adventuresome non-girly-girls that have a keener interest in the outdoor world have a tendency to go there.",
"There's also 4-H! 4-H does a lot of things with STEM and Lego League now--not just for rural kids anymore!",
"I'm an eagle scout, and I actually like that it was just guys. It was our time to do \"guy stuff\" and talk about \"guy stuff\". We were a tight nit group of really close friends. Had girls entered that picture it wouldn't have been the same. \n\nNow, my boy scouts was run through my church, so in addition to boy scouts where it was only male, we had a group where we intermingled and did activities with females as well. The girls had their own female only group, similar to boy scouts. \n\nI think that system worked out perfectly. It allowed the guys to go off and be guys. Do their guy things, that the girls probably wouldn't like. And then intermingle with all the girls and do activities with them.",
"The Boy Scouts have monthly camping trips and most scout masters are men. You would probably have to have both a female and male scoutmaster plus segregated facilities available.",
"UK checking in: Scouting is open to both sexes. Guiding, Girl Guiding, is only open to females. Guiding was originally a female organisation set up by Agnes Baden-Powell to cater for girls who felt left out as Scouting was only for boys. \n\nScouting was for boys because it was primarily a militaristic group that, whilst tending to the needs of boys in their adolescence and helping them grow to be good citizens nevertheless, started as a way of training boys to be good soldiers. Robert Baden-Powell (BP), brother to Agnes (and later husband to Olave), started it following observations of the key role in the Siege of Mafeking (in the Boer wars) that a cadet group of \"boy scouts\" had taken.\n\nSo the segregation starts because 'boys are disposable and so useful for war' whilst girls are more precious.\n\nYou'll need to look at other answers for country specific information on where things have gone since then.\n\nEdit: with - > husband; brain fart!",
"Girl Scouts of America ambassador here. I can't speak as much to the history of the Boy Scouts beyond its inception and some of its current policies, but I have 12+ years in the Girl Scouts (on and off). Despite their similar names, GSA is a completely separate organization from BSA. It was formed two years after BSA. The founder, Juliet Lowe, wanted an equivalent organization to the BSA where girls could learn valuable skills and form friendships, since the BSA was closed to girls. The founders of the two organizations actually knew each other and were acquaintances. The two have never been officially affiliated, though. \n\nGSA is run by local councils, which control some policies of troops in the area, but all councils and troops have to conform to specific rules and codes of conduct. Kind of like a federal/state government kind of thing. But that's why different troops have different experiences and policies regarding gender. I know male troop leaders and scouts, but it may have just been my council that allowed that. All gay, transgender, or gender nonconforming persons are allowed to join the GSA, however.\n\nGSA and BSA both have very different mission statements/goals for their members. They are altogether very different things. There are events meant for everyone in either organization, too. I went to family camping trips with my brother's cub scout troop, and he came to some of mine.\n\nTL;DR: They're not. They're different organizations with different goals and different policies regarding gender."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1wjk3g | ship of theseus | Just read this article _URL_0_, and I still have no clue what could be (one of ) the optimum solutions to this problem. ELI5 please?
Edit: Asking about the possible solutions. Also, what is your opinion and why? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1wjk3g/eli5_ship_of_theseus/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf2kob1",
"cf2ktq6"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There isn't one. That's the point of it being a philosophical thought exercise.",
"The point of a thought experiment is to discover what you think and to lead you into thoughts about the nature of the world. It is not an exam question such that you are trying to guess the correct answer, it is a prompt to get you to examine deeper questions of being. Often with paradoxical ones, it is designed so there is no obvious correct answer, but philosophers with different perspectives on the world will draw different conclusions.\n\nA similar example would be to point out that a person's body cells are replaced completely more than once in their lifetime - is that person the same person? Intuitively most people would say yes, but if you ask *why?*, it's not easy to explain. Hence you trigger a train of thought about what makes something what it is, what defines a human, is there a separate soul etc etc"
]
} | [] | [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
cmvv7b | why is it that when we start getting weight, the most common place for fat to be laid down is the belly? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cmvv7b/eli5_why_is_it_that_when_we_start_getting_weight/ | {
"a_id": [
"ew54ugv",
"ew5a4vd",
"ew5bdie"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"1. Because that is where your major organs are, if you're going to store fat, might as well have it be somewhere that protects them and keeps them warm.\n2. It's also right in the middle of your body's center of gravity, so it doesn't not throw off your balance. If fat built up first somewhere else, like in your feet or legs, it would throw off your balance and inhibit movement.",
"Because humans are predators. Biologically we are persistence hunters, we chase prey until it tires and weakens enough for us to kill it without much risk to ourselves. This requires long periods of walking/ running/stalking. Putting fat anywhere else will hinder this function, so it is put where it interferes the least with our supposed role in nature. There has been some debate as to why fat isn’t deposited on the back first then. Although there is no conclusive evidence, a plausible theory is that making the back fatter greatly increases the risk of head and/or neck injury when falling backwards.",
"You can think of fat cells as little balloons that can either be empty or fill up with lipids. \n\nYou always have (approximately) the same number of fat cells regardless of whether you're thin or overweight... the only difference is whether they are full or not. \n\nYour body genetically has more of these little storage cells in certain places than others... lots of them around your stomach but not many on your elbows for example. \n\nSo when you begin consuming excess calories, they are stored relatively evenly across all the fat cells of your body, it just so happens that a lot of those cells are on your stomach and butt."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2j30zg | if i were to hypothetically remove all the water from the mariana trench, would the high pressure still be there if i was standing at the bottom? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2j30zg/eli5_if_i_were_to_hypothetically_remove_all_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cl7xpe3",
"cl7xrvw",
"cl7y2ii"
],
"score": [
8,
8,
7
],
"text": [
"I assume you mean that if all water were gone in the trench and replaced by air? In that case, you would not have a noticeable pressure on you. Air weighs far, far less than water. You would not have a problem being in the bottom with just air above you.",
"The pressure is caused by the high volume of water above there, because it's very very deep. It's not like the trench emits some kind of high-pressure field. So yes, the high pressure caused by the water would not be there if the water was gone.",
"The bottom is \"only\" 6.81 miles deep. In comparison, Mt. Everest is 5.5 miles up. Apparently the pressure at the top of Mt. Everest is only 1/3rd that of sea level. So assuming a linear gradient of air pressure to altitude (that isn't true, but bear with me), going 6.81 miles below sea level, you will have approximately 1.83 times as much pressure as at sea level. \n\nMeanwhile, diving ~30 feet down into water will cause you to be under 2x sea level pressure, so you only need to dive down ~25 feet to be under the equivalent pressure. \n\nIn any case, the total change in air density to someone just standing there would be negligible. \n\nSide bar, because air is highly compressible, there may be some effects I may be neglecting which could cause a higher pressure. However, recreational scuba divers regularly dive to ~100 ft. (3 additional atmospheres of pressure) with negligible effect (other than decompression requirements on the way up), and I highly doubt that more than 3 additional atmospheres of pressure would arise from going down an additional 6.8 miles in depth. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
55fy3k | why does ssd wear out/slow down as used? and why does hdd not have that problem? should ssd be replaced often to maintain system performance? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/55fy3k/eli5why_does_ssd_wear_outslow_down_as_used_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8a7ido",
"d8a82bw",
"d8a85jy",
"d8aennf",
"d8agzg3",
"d8aha5u",
"d8ai28h",
"d8aiycp"
],
"score": [
9,
132,
5,
59,
24,
5,
2,
19
],
"text": [
"Ssd's have a limited number of reads and writes in their lifetime, but you'll never hit that limit in the lifetime of a consumer computer.",
"The structures that are switched to retain data can and do wear out from use. It's not a perfect system but it meets the needs of being fast, reliable, inexpensive to manufacture and scale able. It's easier to change the drives control firmware to spread write cycles around the memory to prevent over use and to maybe include some extra storage for use when addresses start to become unreliable. \n\nRotational disks have their own problems including the tendency for very closely packed bits of information to bleed into each other over time, physical wear and tear on the heads, positioning servo, and the rotational motor, and physical damage to the disk media from head contact or foreign particles. Once a rotational drive becomes physically damaged from a head strike or failed seal, it may still operate but over time it will only get worse as bits and pieces of debris spread and cause additional damage. Once you start getting bad sectors, it almost always leads to eventual total drive failure. They can also wear out the bearings which allow the drive to spin at high speed with little friction. If you work with drives long enough, you will run into a situation where a system which has been powered on continuously for a very long time is powered down for maintenance, and when you power it back up a disk fails because the bearing has locked once it cooled down. If you're lucky you can get it to spin up again with heat, and back up the data on it. \n\nI work with SSD's in some appliances and I've seen a high amount of failures in the last several months which is un-usual in that they tend to work or not, and once proven to be working they usually don't fail. This is across various sizes and brands of disks so I'm guessing that whoever makes the actual media may have had a bad batch that made it into several MFG's products. ",
"Flash memory has a limited number of write cycles because each new write causes a little damage to the cell that stores a bit of data. Eventually it deteriorates so much that the electrons do pretty much what they want to and the cell breaks down, no longer able to store a definable state.\n\n > SSDs can't write a single bit of information without first erasing and then rewriting very large blocks of data at one time. Each time a cell goes through an erase cycle, some charge is left in the floating-gate transistor, which changes its resistance. As the resistance builds, the amount of current required to change the gate increases. Eventually, the gate can't be flipped at all, rendering it useless. This decaying process doesn't affect the read capabilities of SSD, because reading only requires checking, not changing, the voltages of cells. As a result, NAND flash can \"rot\" into a read-only state. \n\nI try to keep my SSD away from write heavy tasks to get the most longevity out of it.",
"Pretend you have a short piece of iron wire, and this piece of wire represents a single bit in your SSD or HD.\n\nIn a SSD, the ones and zeros are stored by bending the wire up or down. In a HD, the ones and zeros are stored by imparting a magnetic charge to the wire, giving or taking away a magnetic field. \n\nIf you have ever bent a wire repeatedly, you know that the wires in the SSD will wear out and break eventually. When that happens, the bit becomes permanently stuck on or off, depending on the technology.\n\nIn the case of the HD, its magnetic field can be changed almost forever without damaging the wire. In that case, It will be something else that fails: the bearings, the seals, the power supply, etc. ",
"None of these answers have addressed the 'speed degradation', only the limited life span, so I'll give that part of the question a shot.\n\nSSD's become slower as they fill up because unlike conventional HDD's, they cannot overwrite existing data. The data must first be deleted and then written, adding an extra step to the process. To exasperate this problem, data on SSD's is broken down into blocks, and those blocks contain pages. If a single page of data needs to be modified, the entire block needs to updated. So instead of just writing your single new page of data, the SSD must first copy all of the current pages in that block, delete the block, then rewrite the pages of that block including the new page you wanted. These extra steps mean slower performance when writing data to an SSD.\n\nWhen an SSD is new or freshly formatted, this isn't an issue as most of the blocks are free to write to. However, as the SSD fills up, the drive will more frequently need to go through the multiple steps of copy, delete, write. Not only is this 'double write' slow, it also increases the wear on the drive because as others have mentioned, SSD's have a limited number of writes before they fail. \n\n\n",
"To answer your final question, no. SSDs don't need to be replaced often. Their average lifespan is more than long enough to meet average consumer needs.\n\nEven then, one of the many advantages they have over HDDs is that an SSD tends to fail slowly. Blocks degrade over time, but they do this in a slow and somewhat predictable way. When a block fails, the data can be moved to a currently empty block, likely saving it. In other words, you'll have plenty of time and warning to backup your data to a new drive. By contrast, mechanical failure is the big worry for HDDs, which tends to be much more catastrophic and hard to predict.",
"I didn't know SSDs fail. So what is the best way to long term store my photos and important documents?",
"Short answer: We're pretty good at making HDD and not so good at making SSD yet. You don't need to replace your SSD to maintain performance unless the drive tells you that it's dying, you'll just run out of space for new things.\n\nMedium answer: Find a hard drive that's 5+ years old and scan for corrupted sectors. Generally by then you should start seeing some. First gen hard drives had horrible problems with wear but they generally sorted out how to keep one spinning for about 10-15 years by the 90's. Some of the nicer/most expensive SSDs these days will last about that long, we just have to wait 4-8 years for that kind of life span to become a commodity.\n\nLong Answer: Physics. Solid state drives store data by electrocuting a tiny chunk of metal in different ways. Hard disc drives store data by blasting a tiny chunk of metal with a giant magnet hard enough that the little thing stays magnetized. There's a much bigger physical change happening when a SSD changes state. On the other hand, magnetism naturally goes away much faster than the physical change that happens in a SSD, so if you wrote something on a drive, the SSD would remember it in 20 years, but the HDD might have blurred into magnetic soup. But either way people don't care about that because we replace our hardware well before it reaches that kind of lifespan. Right now people want bigger faster drives for less money, and they don't seem to care about write cycles because they're good enough. SLC is the fast expensive stuff that won't wear out for years and years, MLC is the midrange stuff that will wear out in about 5-10 years of normal use, TLC will wear out in under 5 years for many users. Currently people know this and MLC or TLC is still what they choose to go with because it hits the right fast/cheap/large points. Once SLC comes down in price and we learn how to make it tougher there won't be any wear out issues as it ages (compared to hard drives at least)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1y8e02 | how bad would it really be for the western world if china was to go bust. | I was reading this article _URL_0_ and I was wondering how a bankrupt China would be more dangerous then one in an economic decline. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1y8e02/eli5how_bad_would_it_really_be_for_the_western/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfi8k1z",
"cfi8ol5",
"cfihfk1"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They produce a lot of our goods, and they buy a lot of our debt. Consumer goods would skyrocket in price and the value of the dollar would steeply decline. In other words the stores would almost all be out of stock, and whatever is still available for sale would cost too much.",
"China is now the second largest economy in the world. \n\nEconomies are now intricately connected due to \"recent\" and rapid globalization. \n\nEveryone does business with everyone. Now remove the second largest player. Because of how interconnected everything is now, every other country would feel the effects. ",
"So bad. So so bad. Imagine you and a buddy do a lot of stuff together. Like just about everything. You eat together, play basketball together, etc. You get along really well with this buddy and really enjoy spending time with him, especially so. Serious bromance here. Additionally lets say you have other friends you do stuff with too, but not as much stuff. However, there is a maximum amount of time you could possibly spend with these other friends; if your best friend were to go on vacation for a few days you would not equally substitute your other friends time with the time that would have been spent with your best friend. You would probably just rather spend time alone. \n\nWe can think of the differences between a bankrupt and a recessed China as being similar to the differences between a good friend leaving for a month and a good friend leaving for a year. Now if your friend were to leave you couldn't really do the stuff you like while he's gone. You can do stuff with your other friends but you find yourself home alone and bored for more time than you otherwise would. There is generally less activity going on due to the loss of this good friend. \n\nThis is true economically as well. More economic cooperation between countries means more economic growth for those countries. If China were to go on a production \"vacation\" due to a recession or bankruptcy, we would lose crucial time with a very good business friend. Activity levels, our output, would drop and we would be upset.\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26225205"
] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2bjrwz | why sleeping in fetal position is bad for you | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bjrwz/eli5_why_sleeping_in_fetal_position_is_bad_for_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj60j0z"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because your neck most likely isn't in a good position since the pillow might be too high or too low. The other point is that deep breathing is restricted in the fetal position which is essential for a restful sleep."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
69fype | why do mris cost so much in the us compared to india | I recently had a minor ankle injury and the doctor wanted and recommended an MRI. I'm in Ohio and I was quoted $2100 by the hospital to get an MRI on my ankle. I have an HSA so this would have been all out of pocket. I already had a work trip scheduled to India so I waited it out for 2.5 weeks until I got there to find out how much an MRI procedure cost. I was quoted $110, after converting the Indian Rupee to USD, for the MRI. The MRI machine was a Siemens machine and looked fairly new. I went ahead and had the MRI done in India and brought the images back to my doctor in the US and he was able to make a diagnosis and was shocked at the price I paid for the MRI. I know the fee I paid was not subsidized. Can someone please explain to me why the US pays soo much more for the MRI then our Asian counterparts when the results we get are the same? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/69fype/eli5_why_do_mris_cost_so_much_in_the_us_compared/ | {
"a_id": [
"dh6at4k",
"dh6b67n",
"dh6ovaz"
],
"score": [
10,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"It's not just asia. Compare US prices to those paid even next door in Canada. This is the same for almost all medical care - in America you pay much more for the same thing.\n\nIn all 3 of those countries an MRI machine costs a lot of money. In two of those countries that MRI machine will be utilized to the fullest because of market forces; India doesn't have enough rich people to pay inflated rates so they need to recoup the cost in smaller increments, in Canada the government who is paying most medical bills is a strong negotiator so again they must be efficient and productive to make a profit.\n\nIn the US however you simply have sick people who are in no position to negotiate - the consumers overwhelming desire to continue *living* removes the choice of the free market, creating the conditions for an easy monopoly even among a number of 'competing' entities. In such a position the MRI machine owner has a choice - operate the machine 24 hours a day at $500 per patient, or operate it for 6 hours a day at $2000 per patient. Sure many patients can't afford those rates but since you only need to serve a few to make the same gross (and a higher profit once operating expenses are subtracted) it's actually better to serve fewer patients. Sure that means 3 out of 4 people get no care while the one who does might go into bankruptcy but it means more money in the pocket of the MRI owner.",
"1. The US has a culture of lawsuits and so, the cost of these is priced in to the cost of treatment, which India does not.\n2. The profit motive is stronger in the US than other countries. I live in Spain now, but used to, until fairly recently, live in the US. My wife was diagnosed with stage 0 breast cancer a few years ago here. Total cost of her treatment was 90 euro (around US$100). I shudder to think how much the treatment would cost in the States. It would be \nhigher even though she has US insurance.",
"There is a very high mark-up in the US.\n\nAn workhorse MRI machine (for normal medical use, not research) costs about $1.5 million for the machine, and about $500k for installation, building work, set-up, etc. If you get a loan for the machine, then that's maybe $100k interest per year. The machine lasts about 10 years, and costs about $250k per year for warranty/service plan/software updates/etc. Add in $50k per year for electricity, HVAC, water, etc. and it costs around $600k per year to buy and run the machine.\n\nIf you run the machine 50 hours per week, then that works out at about $200 per hour for the machine. You need a technician and an assistant to run the machine - say $100 per hour for staff.\n\nA scan takes 20 minutes, so costs about $100 for machine and staff.\n\nAdd in various admin costs, office costs, building costs/rent, IT equipment, servers for data storage, reception staff, etc. - and you are looking at about $150 base cost for a scan, assuming that every single appointment slot is filled (and this may mean that there is a long waiting list for a scan).\n\nIf you can't fill the scanner completely (150-200 appointments a week, every week) and have \"empty slots\", then you have to spread the cost of the scanner and staff over fewer scans - which puts the cost up.\n\nYou need a radiologist to read the scan, and the fees vary - this might be $5 in India, where a radiologist is reading scans like a production line and reading 50 a day. If it's clinic doing 10 scans a week, in the US, and a radiologist is making a special trip in to read 1 scan, it may be $500 or more. In the UK, a typical radiologist working in a production line situation would be paid around $15 for an MRI read.\n\nDifferent scans may require different amounts of time. Some hospitals will do a brain scan in 15 minutes. Other hospitals will spend an hour doing it. One of those hospitals will have to charge a lot more. This is particularly the case in the US, where it is common to do very detailed, repeated scans of the same area (for example, if I do an MRI scan of the brain, I scan the brain 3 times, with different scanner settings, at 5 minutes each; but I've seen scans sent from the US, where they scan the brain 9 times for the same examination)\n\nAnother issue is whether a contrast agent is injected. Gadolinium injections can be used to get extra information with MRI. You do a scan before the injection, then give the injection, and do some more scans - and see what changes. \n\nThe gadolinium costs about $20 for a dose. Plus there is staff time, consumables (gloves, cleaning wipes, hypodermics, etc.), plus the extra scanner time (including the \"dead time\" while the scanner is idle during the injection). Gadolinium is used a lot in the US, and much less elsewhere. \n\nIt is possible to get the costs down even lower, if you try to source older equipment (e.g. it's quite common after an MRI scanner is decommissioned in Europe or the US, for it to be sold to India, China, etc.) Additionally, for old machines, you may be able to get an independent specialist to take over the servicing, instead of going to the manufacturer who tends to be very expensive."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2ncw21 | how does the policy of "total war" affect the economy? | During WWII, many nations went into a state of total war where the entire economy is tuned for war. How does this actually affect an economy? Does it make a tank that would normally cost millions into costing a few thousand? Will it strengthen the economy afterwards? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ncw21/eli5_how_does_the_policy_of_total_war_affect_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmcgx06"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Total war is not about profits, its about capacity. You don't do it because its especially profitable, but because you have to to maximize output. \nYour whole economy is dedicaded to war and has to be rearranged while there are very little \"luxury consumer goods\" afterwards, so no, your economy will take a blow during war. \nHowever, a destroyed land and non-existend industry for anything but war will leave much space for \"regrowth\" afterwards."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
26odwr | how is all motion relative? is there an "absolute" motion? what about motion relative to the entire universe? | What are the implications of such a motion? Can we safely assume that the entire universe, as an example, is not in motion relative to everything and is absolutely stationary? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26odwr/eli5_how_is_all_motion_relative_is_there_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"chsxt2u"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Motion is relative because in relation to different frames of reference, things can appear to be going faster, slower, etc.\n\nSo, for example, I am sitting at my computer going 0 mph. But, if you look at the big picture, I have the velocity of the Earth's rotational spin, as well as its speed of orbit.\n\nIf you are driving 70mph and someone is driving 69 mph, and you try to pass them, it is like they are going still, and you are going 1 mph. You will pass slowly. But to a nearby observer, you guys are going 70mph / 69mph which is relatively fast (in relation to the observer).\n\nBecause there is no singular point of the universe in which we could call it 'point zero' (all movement revolves around or is connected with this point) and the observable universe is always moving, we must use reference frames to talk about velocity because without reference, saying 20mph is as useless as telling you the party is located at the big blue house - You need more context."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3iyn9a | how do computer extensions work? ( .exe .inf .iso .bat, etc) | Thank you guys this was very helpful | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3iyn9a/eli5_how_do_computer_extensions_work_exe_inf_iso/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuksxyb",
"cuksy54",
"cukt0v4",
"cukt3cv",
"cukt4hl",
"cukxkcn",
"culha97"
],
"score": [
222,
21,
2,
3,
20,
11,
2
],
"text": [
"For Windows, the file extensions tell the OS what type of data to expect in the file. It uses the extension to tell if the file is itself a program that it can run (.exe) or what program it should open when you double click on the file. For example if you have Microsoft Word installed, it knows to open .doc files in Word.\n\nThat's all the file extensions really do. You can change the file extension and that file will probably still work in the program the file was originally meant for. Conversely, the program associated with the new extension probably won't be able to make sense of the file and will tell you it couldn't open the file, or it will just appear as gibberish.\n\nDifferent operating systems might have different rules about file extensions. I hear Linux doesn't actually use them to identify the file type, they're just there so the user can tell what type of file they are.",
"A file extension is just a part of the filename. When you double-click a file, the operating system uses the file extension to decide which program to open the file with (whichever program that is registered with the operating system to handle this type of file).\n\nSome file extensions mark the file as executable - exe, bat, com. When you double-click them, the operating system will treat them as program files and will try to execute them directly, instead of launching another program to handle them.\n\nYou can easily change the file extension and \"confuse\" the operating system. If I took a jpg file and changed its extension to pdf and then double-click it, the operating system will attempt to load the file into a pdf viewer (such as Adobe Reader). The pdf viewer will then say that the file is \"corrupted\", because it expected a pdf file and got a jpg instead.",
"They just tell the operating system what kind of information is to be expected in the file, and what format it is, how it can be used (and by what program).\n\nLots of programs have procedures through which you can associate an extension type with that program, to enable the double-clicking of said files to work like running a program - the associated program runs and loads that file inside itself.\n\nMost files are binary information, which means that typically only the program that created them knows how to extract information from them. A simple example is Microsoft Word. You need the extension to be able to associate Word with the file instantly. It also helps you manually, as in you know which files are what type and how you can open them.",
"computer extension tell your operating system how to interpret that file. Each extension type arranges its contents in a very specific way and needs to be interpreted or handled in a certain way or else it will create errors.\n\nFor example, a .exe is an Executable, which means it is a file that serves to start up a larger program. Alternatively, a .bmp means the file is a Bit Map, or a picture where the file contains the locations and color of individual pixels.\n\nAn example of how operating system plays a role in this is how .exe are Executables on Windows, but Executables on Mac are denoted by the .app extension.\n\nEDIT: Correction (.dmg to .app)",
"On UNIX-based and UNIX-like Operating Systems, the file extensions don't really matter, they're mostly just for personal preference or perhaps to help you organize your files into different categories. The Operating System can read the file header to determine what type of file it is and what the most appropriate software would be to open it. You may also be able to set what software should open individual files regardless of their extension.\n\nOn Windows, file extensions are really important. They are used as a formal indicator of the type of file and Windows will treat files differently based on their extension.\n\nCertain extensions like .exe, .bat, .msi, and .scr are reserved for executable files (i.e. programs that the computer can execute), and Windows is not designed to allow you to run programs that have other file extensions (such as .app). Renaming a standard text file to .exe or something will make Windows try and run the text file as if it was executable code (which obviously won't work and will throw an error).\n\nSo, on Windows, you have different extensions that are reserved for different types of files and the extension determines how the file will be handled by the Operating System and what application will be used to open the file.\n\nAn .iso file, for example, is for a disk (or disc) image. An image, in this context, means sort of like an archive file (like a zip) that contains a 'mirror image' of another storage medium (like a hard disk or optical disc), so it's sort of like a virtual drive.\n\nA .bat file is used for running system commands in batch (instead of typing out each command one by one into the Windows command prompt).\n\n.inf files are plain text files normally used to configure settings for installation of Windows applications.",
"Every file is just 1s and 0s. For the 1s and 0s to be useful, we need to all agree on what they mean. For example, we could agree that \"10\" means 2 and \"100\" means 4 and so on for every number, and now we have a way to store numbers. Or we could agree that \"01000001\" means \"A\" and \"01000010\" means \"B\" and so on for every letter, and now we have a way to store text.\n\nBut now we have a problem: when we read \"0000010100111001\", is that a number or text? That's the problem that file extensions solve. All they are is hint to your computer, saying \"the 1s and 0s in this file should be interpretted like they're X\". If your computer knows what X is then it can go ahead and interpret the file like it's X, and if it doesn't, it can tell you that it doesn't know what to do with the file.",
"An extension is just a way to tell your operating system which program should be called to open that file. So a \".exe\" is expected to be executed, a \".avi\" to be open with VLC (or any other player), a \".txt\" with a text editor. Those are just naming convention for the file name and that's all. If you rename a \".txt\" file into a \".exe\", the system will try to execute your file and will fail.\n\nMore generally, you can classify file extensions in categories such as \"Video (avi,mpeg,mp4,divx,xvid) or Music (mp3,ogg,etc.). Those are called MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) , it was originally designed for the mail as a way to describe the files attached but is now use for other applications such as configuring your OS.\n\nOn a modern operating system such as a GNU/Linux distribution, you can override this behaviour with the file $HOME/.config/mimeapps.list \nHere is a list of file to configure the default application associated to a certain type of file.\n\nPath\t | Usage\n---|---\n$HOME/.config/$desktop-mimeapps.list | user overrides, desktop-specific\n$HOME/.config/mimeapps.list | user overrides\n/etc/xdg/$desktop-mimeapps.list | sysadmin and vendor overrides, desktop-specific\n/etc/xdg/mimeapps.list | sysadmin and vendor overrides\n$HOME/.local/share/applications/$desktop-mimeapps.list | for compatibility but now deprecated, desktop-specific\n$HOME/.local/share/applications/mimeapps.list | for compatibility but now deprecated\n/usr/local/share/applications/$desktop-mimeapps.list | distribution-provided defaults, desktop-specific\n/usr/local/share/applications/mimeapps.list /usr/share/applications/mimeapps.list | distribution-provided defaults\n\n[source](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Default_applications"
]
] |
|
1o4rrr | "made in china". why do we label where a shirt is produced, but not where the cotton is grown? | I am thinking with regard to clothing in particular, although most consumer goods are this way. Why do we label where something is assembled into its final product, but not where the raw materials are obtained? Is there a historical or legal precedent? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1o4rrr/eli5_made_in_china_why_do_we_label_where_a_shirt/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccos4e2",
"ccotp9y",
"ccou41o"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Country of origin labels are normally mandated to protect local labor (by encouraging people to buy locally made), so the location of the labor is the important thing.",
"Often times, it is because it is too hard. Companies buy commodities like cotton on the open market, and will often buy batches of cotton from multiple suppliers in multiple countries. A factory may use cotton from Australia, India, China and America on the same day. They may specifically blend cotton from different sources to achieve the desired strength at the best cost.\n\nNote also that one company may make the thread from cotton from around the world, and sell it to another company that makes it into cloth, which is sold to another company to make the T-shirt. Keeping track of who grew the cotton would be too hard.",
"It started when British manufacturers wanted to promote their products in early 1900's. With lobbying, they were able to make it into legislation, and all sellers had to mark their products country of origin. They wanted to send message that their products are superior because they are patriotic. Their primary goal was to promote their sells, not genuine interest to protect public from foreign goods. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
c6cy25 | why an opt out tax for socially divisive services like planned parenthood is a bad idea. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c6cy25/eli5_why_an_opt_out_tax_for_socially_divisive/ | {
"a_id": [
"es7u1tg",
"es7u2ce",
"es7u7sb"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I’m no politician but I’m guessing enough people would opt out simply to save money that programs like planned parenthood would not have the funding necessary to continue operations.",
"Free rider problem.\n\nBasically, everybody opts out because nobody likes taxes and most people are goddamn dumb.",
"Great idea but it wouldnt work most the people that need that kind of service dont work or couldnt afford the tax"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1dlf9p | who benefits financially from the anti-vaccine movement? | I have read opposing views on this topic that both site scientific evidence. Usually when I'm deciding what to believe I like to "follow the money". For example, scientific evidence will site that oats are good for you but the study might be funded by General Mills.
Who benefits financially from telling people not to vaccinate their kids? I don't understand a direct money trail for that viewpoint. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dlf9p/eli5_who_benefits_financially_from_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9rf68h",
"c9rf8gd",
"c9rfu12",
"c9rfu32",
"c9rhl5u",
"c9ri6k2",
"c9ribrb",
"c9ridb6",
"c9riu67",
"c9riwnd",
"c9satkp"
],
"score": [
30,
4,
12,
53,
4,
4,
31,
4,
4,
20,
2
],
"text": [
"I don't know that anyone does, really. Maybe some homeopaths and other snake oil sales people, but ultimately there is more paranoia than profit in the anti-vax movement.",
"I don't know that anyone benefits from it at all. Its just a horrible case of misinformation that keeps spreading itself. ",
"Alternative medicine practitioners, most notably homeopaths. Homeopaths offer an alternative homeopathic vaccine (that does nothing) and have spent considerable funds trying to push an anti-vaccine agenda.",
"While \"following the money\" *can* be a good strategy, it's probably remiss to assume that it *must* be a factor in everything.\n\nThe anti-vaccine movement is driven by emotional advocates: people who *think* they have suffered (either directly or indirectly) as a result of vaccination, and have access to *just* enough medical knowledge to make vaguely-true-but-misleading claims, etc. They're not benefitting financially from it; they just genuinely believe it's putting people's lives at risk, and they want to stop it.\n\nThe only people who'd make money off it are the lawyers (prosecuting the case), and maybe the 'alternative medicine' crowd pushing their alternative products.",
"As a money follower myself, I'm here to say that no one benefits. Not financially, and certainly no one's health benefits.",
"Funeral homes for children who die of easily preventable diseases because some people are simply moronic?",
"IDK but here's a scary thought: I'm a new mom (baby is 8 months) and amongst my friends and social group of other moms, I am the *only* one having my baby vaccinated. The others look down upon me for doing it. My baby hasn't missed a single one that the doctor recommended. The day she got her first one, the doctor handed me a huge pamphlet urging me to vaccinate. I skimmed over it and gave him the thumbs up. Hey, I'm all for the earth mama stuff - at home births, breastfeeding, etc - but I cross the line at no vaccination. ",
"**ELI5 Answer:** The Boogeyman. If you don't get your vaccines the Boogeyman wins.\n\n**Actual Answer:** Nobody. I can't think of a single (sane) person who would actually benefit from telling people not to vaccinate and/or not being vaccinated. Polio, among other diseases, could be completely eradicated if everyone worldwide had access to vaccines.",
"There are a few \"experts\" who make a living writing books, selling DVDs, and speaking engagements.\n\nYou also have [washed up actors](_URL_0_) and [professional pot stirrers](_URL_1_) whose careers are helped by the publicity and controversy. \n\nBut mostly it is sad parents of autistic children who are in denial, and want to find some meaning. :(",
"The original money scheme involved Andrew Wakefield, who was (to make a long story short) a UK doctor that had been hired by a lawyer to prove that the MMR vaccine was linked to autism. Wakefield had filed in March 1995 claiming that “Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis may be diagnosed by detecting measles virus in bowel tissue, bowel products or body fluids,” and proposed starting a company that could reap huge returns from molecular viral diagnostic tests. It predicted a turnover from Britain and America of up to £72.5m a year.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nAlso, there are several authors and celebrities that command high speaking fees",
"Vaccines protect the majority of people. Some people are adversely affected. It is a question of which one to serve. It can be (if you are a fear monger) a question of trusting the vaccine manufacturer. There have been problems (there will always be problems, like there will always be car accidents) and some people use these problems (or invent them out of thin air) for platforms to promote their quest (seeking fame, or they are just suffering from delusion) to 'save the world'. \n\nNow if you want to hear of my personal experience, read on. My daughter, at 6 weeks of age suffered a seizure after the MMP vaccine. The pediatrician immediately suspected the pertussis and wrote in her chart, as well as telling me, that she should avoid it in the future. This was not an easy battle (schools, etc), and did receive all the other vaccines required. She is a high functioning aspergers child. I have made no conclusions as to why. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000189/",
"http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005175/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1"
],
[
"http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/01/12/andrew-wakefield-in-it-for-the-money-all/"
],
[]
] |
|
zyuqz | how does an ip address get resolved to a physical location? | I understand how the internet and DNS work, but how can a packet find its physical destination just by the IP address? How does any of the nodes a packet passes on its way know in which "direction" the packet has to be sent? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zyuqz/how_does_an_ip_address_get_resolved_to_a_physical/ | {
"a_id": [
"c68xzi2",
"c69hxua"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A simplified version is that networks announce the IP addresses that they know about in what is called CIDR blocks. These are a way of representing a block of ip address. So 192.168.0.0/24 is all the addresses from 192.168.0.0 to 192.168.0.255. Then other networks pick up these announcements and re-announce them further out.\n\nEach network has an ASN, which is basically a number assigned just to it. \n\nSay network 1 knows about 192.168.0.0/24, and the networks are connected like:\n1 - 2 - 3 - 4.\n\n1 would announce that the path to 192.168.0.0/24 was directly to it. Then 2 would announce that the path to 192.168.0.0/24 was the path 2-1, then 3 would announce the path to 192.168.0.0/24 was 3-2-1.\n\nWhen network 4 looks to send a packet to 192.168.0.0/24 it knows that it should send it to 3. If someone then hooked a cable between network 4 and network 1 then network 4 would see two ways to get to 192.168.0.0/24. Either the path '1', or the path '3-2-1'. It would then take the shorter path.",
"Basically, when you connect to the internet, you establish an IP address with the first router you come into contact with. That router logs your IP and tells every router that its connected to that it has your address. Each of those routers broadcasts that they have your IP address to each one they are connected to, and so on."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2klwsu | why do we call giving someone the middle finger. “flipping the bird”? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2klwsu/eli5_why_do_we_call_giving_someone_the_middle/ | {
"a_id": [
"clmm28c",
"clmm378",
"clmm6ss",
"clmqu4k",
"clmtr4l",
"cln1i2q"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
36,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Not called that in Australia.\n\nWe just call it \"giving the finger\".",
"the middle finger is the biggest, so it symbolizes the penis. \n\na common synonym for penis is cock.\n\na cock is a bird.\n\n\"flipping the bird\" is waving your penis at someone.\n",
"bird (3)\n\"middle finger held up in a rude gesture,\" slang derived from 1860s expression give the big bird \"to hiss someone like a goose,\" kept alive in vaudeville slang with sense of \"to greet someone with boos, hisses, and catcalls\" (1922), transferred 1960s to the \"up yours\" hand gesture (the rigid finger representing the hypothetical object to be inserted) on notion of defiance and contempt. Gesture itself seems to be much older (the human anatomy section of a 12c. Latin bestiary in Cambridge describes the middle finger as that \"by means of which the pursuit of dishonour is indicated\").\n\n",
"Because the middle finger is the bird, and when you stick it up, you flip it.",
"cuz the thumb and pinkie look like wings. geez dont you watch flight of the conchords?",
"Birds used to land on people's hands *all the time*. This would engage people, so they would raise their middle fingers to literally flip the birds off.\n\nSource: N/A."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
b9xjvo | why fats are essential if the body can convert and store them from carbohydrates? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b9xjvo/eli5_why_fats_are_essential_if_the_body_can/ | {
"a_id": [
"ek7l2dh",
"ek7ml83"
],
"score": [
6,
4
],
"text": [
"There are specific kinds of lipids, what make up fats, that your body uses for various functions (including brain function) that cannot be created by the body. They have to be obtained through diet. These lipids are a different kind of fat than the storage fat your body creates. ",
"Two separate reasons: \n\n1) Some vitamins are fat- soluble, meaning you won't get enough of them or be able to absorb them without eating some form of fat, namely vitamins A, D, E, and K.\n\n2) Anything referred to (by a nutritionist, not an advertiser) as an \"essential\" nutrient means it is something the body can't produce on its own. The fatty acid \"linoleic acid\" is something you must eat.\n\nSo basically, you need to eat some fats (especially the healthy ones) to get vitamins and fatty acids that your body CAN'T make on its own, even though it does make fat from extra calories you've consumed to store them. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
aacfze | what happens to dna when it's frozen? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aacfze/eli5_what_happens_to_dna_when_its_frozen/ | {
"a_id": [
"ecqt2uv",
"ecrc36q"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"DNA still has a half life. Even if it's frozen or fossilized. This was covered in several youtube videos about dinosaur DNA and if it worked like the movies. We're finding better ways to take care of DNA but even if it's frozen it's \"dying.\"\n\nBut half life of DNA is thousands of years so... ",
"Yeah we use it a lot usually at -80 or -155C. It slows done the reactions that would usually damage and alter the DNA like oxidation or hydrolysis"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4mcuyo | why is the blackberry messaging system "safer" than others / how is it encrypted? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4mcuyo/eli5_why_is_the_blackberry_messaging_system_safer/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3uffif"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"They are one of the only messaging systems that use full end to end asymetric encryption. Each handset have the only copy of a built in private decryption key. The coresponding encryption key is made public. The sender encrypts the message before it is sent to blackberry and it can only be decrypted by the receiver."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7e1c4f | why do we wake up starving the morning after a night of binge eating? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7e1c4f/eli5_why_do_we_wake_up_starving_the_morning_after/ | {
"a_id": [
"dq1ritc",
"dq1s4eu",
"dq1sceo",
"dq1uh9u",
"dq1uqkk",
"dq1xs0x",
"dq1yt3r",
"dq1zw2w",
"dq226fp",
"dq227nl",
"dq263jd",
"dq26vu8",
"dq27zqk",
"dq2a26k",
"dq2a4u3",
"dq2g7bp",
"dq2jlg7",
"dq2js2h"
],
"score": [
1408,
143,
3,
53,
12,
23806,
5,
49,
11,
3,
52,
2,
496,
9,
2,
5,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"It depends on what you've eaten.\n\n\nWhen you eat a meal at bedtime, particularly one rich in sugars and other simple carbohydrates, you generate an insulin surge from your pancreas. Upon retiring, this insulin begins pushing glucose into your cells, a process that continues as you sleep. During the night, a continual drop in your blood glucose stimulates the release of counter-regulatory hormones, leading to stimulation of your appetite centers. Unless you get up in the middle of the night to satisfy your appetite, you will be hungry upon arising in the morning.\n",
"What is happening blood sugar levels rebound from being way too high, temporarily putting you in a 'starving' state with regards to blood sugar. This is called [reactive hypoglycemia](_URL_1_). Basically you are throwing your body's hormones way out of line. The large amount of insulin your body has to produce to deal with the amount of food you ate can lead to [type 2 diabetes](_URL_0_), where your body becomes less responsive to insulin and you have to poke yourself with needles for pretty much the rest of your life.",
"When you eat so much before sleeping (probably lots of carbs/sugar) you wake up so hungry, because your body is now activated to burn all the food and while sleeping it will continue to do so.\n\nAnd after a long night rest of approx. 6h you wake up empty and hungry because your body has just been digesting and laying around.",
"Go check out the fasting and keto subs for a complete answer but essentially you are in a cycle of high glucose - insulin release - crash - hunger",
"We usually get hungry every 4-5 hours during the day. We sleep usually 7-8 hours do it’s about that time to eat again. Your body has been digesting for a good amount of time ",
"Insulins fucked it up.\n\nYour body needs glucose for energy. Everything you eat is broken down into glucose.\n\n1. Foods like \"sugary\" foods, starch or very simple carbohydrates like rice, bread, pasta, etc, are digested very fast and thus, broken down and turned into glucose very fast.\n\n2. Now, when you eat lots of those foods, lots of glucose goes into your blood very fast.\n\nAnd your pancrea produce little guys (hormones) called insulins who push that glucose into your cells.\n\n3. When lots of glucose goes into your blood very fast, your organ pancrea freaks out and is like \"OMFG! Too much glucose in the blood. Too much glucose wandering around in the blood = poison!! Guys!!, Insulins!!, go go go!!! Go push them into the muscle cells and fat cells to properly store them.\" and then Pancrea produce lots of fucking insulins. May be even too much insulins.\n\n4. Those lots of little fuckers called insulines push all the glucose from your blood into the cells.\n\n5. Then, very low level of glucose in your blood. So, your body thinks \"Hey, my blood needs glucose. I need sugar(glucose). Feed me.\"",
"Who spends a night binge eating?",
"The question is why I'm not hungry in the morning, when the night before I was struggling falling asleep, because I was starving to death.",
"I think these answers are missing some subtle more nuanced points. Your body is always drawing energy from a blend of sources: simple sugars (sucrose, fructose), complex sugars (carbs), and fats (lipids). [Protein as well but we will leave that out for this discussion]\n\nYour body has evolved to VERY efficiently use everything you put into your mouth for energy so when you have a crazy night where you stuff yourself your body panics to make sure none of that valuable energy is wasted.\n\nIf you have a normal diet (not over eating, low in added sugar, low in high glycemic starchy foods, and high in good fats and fibers) your body gets very comfortable flipping to using a higher percentage of fats (from foods and from cells). This is called ketogenic adaptation. Most modern adults have VERY poor ketogenic adaption. Basically we go all day with way too many calories in our diets. We spend all day with wild insulin rides because the body is constantly trying to shuttle all the excess food to muscles or fat.\n\nSo most people with a modern diet wake up starving everyday because everyday is binge eating because they've lost all sense of what is 'normal' eating. When you binge eat you've just ratcheted an already lifelong problem to an even higher level. Binge eating also is normally partnered with lots of simple sugar consumption because sugar is everywhere in the american diet. It's even squirreled away in foods we don't think have sugar or don't taste sweet.\n\nAnd here's the last piece of the puzzle. People with normal diets get good at using fat and flipping to fat usage so at night as their bodies naturally slip into ketosis. They wake up with slight or zero hunger because they're using their own fat stores for energy upon waking. People that don't go into ketosis go to bed and their bodies are still very busy shuttling all the energy to fat but they never reverse the flow and start using fat. Insulin just keeps trying to drive glucose into the muscle and fat stores.\n\nIn fact most people that undergo strict high fat low carb diet regimes become VERY ill for up to a week and feel like death because they are using metabolic pathways that their ancestors were using daily and they might not have used their entire lives.\n\nTL;DR most people on modern high fat, high starch, high sugar diets wake up hungry because of poor fat usage adaptation and binge eating just makes it worse.",
"Then why do I wake up starving af. Take 3 bites of food and feel sick? My body hates me..",
"We tend to think of hunger as an indicator that our stomach is empty but this is not how hunger works. Hunger is controlled by hormones and there is a psychological component. Whether you eat a lot or a little before bed, your body will have digested it all within 8 hours. \n\nThe first hunger hormone is ghrelin which comes in waves. If you eat 3 meals a day every day, you will get 3 waves of ghrelin around those meal times. If you skip a meal you do not continue to get hungrier, but the hunger will go away (even though your stomach is still empty). If you fast for a few days, hunger can go away altogether. \n\nIn your scenario, I think it is more about triggering a larger surge in ghrelin than it has to do with insulin. \n\nThe body is good at regulating blood sugar and crashes are not as common as people make them out to be (this is a serious medical condition). Plus if you ate lots of carbs that means your glycogen stores are full and instead of blood sugar going low the body would just tap into these stores.\n\n\n\n",
"I have never woken up hungry in the morning. In fact I feel like throwing up if I try to force food dow",
"Probably too late to the answer party. But you're probably not actually hungry. The insulin answers are sort of right, but your body is very, very good at controlling glucose levels unless you're diabetic. It will have some fairly large swings after binge eating but by morning it should be mostly stabilized and your body has stored a lot of the calories (and used some of them). You're probably dehydrated. A lot of people can't differentiate properly between feelings of hunger and feelings of thirst (a lot of the time anyway). Combine not drinking for however many hours you were asleep, digestion itself requires energy and water. On top of that, glucose being forced into cells pulls water with them because now there's more stuff inside the cells and they want to keep the concentration of that stuff about the same as before. So try having a glass of water in the morning after binge eating, give it 30 minutes and you should feel mostly better.\n\nEdit: binge eating, not binge drinking. Though both apply sort of",
"This sucks worse when you eat a huge meal and go to take an hour nap, wake up and just immediate starving like you didn't eat anything.",
"Follow up, lot of answers in here all around insulin levels, but I always thought the biggest culprit was my stomach was stretched out more from the night before (ie bender at Fogo de Chao, Thanksgiving dinner...), then in the morning it was still stretched out from all the food and is shrinking and looking for more food...\n\nDid I make this up? That next morning my stomach is growling fierce. Is that all caused by insulin?",
"Can I piggyback a question off this and ask if this is a similar reason for being hungry earlier if I eat breakfast, versus not being hungry until late afternoon if I skip breakfast? ",
"I really don't understand the premise of this question. I always have the opposite problem: No matter what happens at night, whether I'm hungry or full, I wake up not hungry. I only eat breakfast because I'll feel really hungry and lightheaded by the time lunch comes around, and all of a sudden too after being not hungry for a while. However, once I start eating breakfast, I get hungrier.",
"On the evolutionary why (Why are we wired this way, instead of how the wiring works. There are already some very good answers on that):\n\nTL;DR: In a feast-and-famine environment, animals benefit from consuming as much as they can during the feast periods, and the most efficient way to do that is eat-sleep-eat. The same reason you can eat to your capacity even if you don't need that many calories is the reason you would come back for seconds.\n\nLong Version:\nAnimals in general (including humans) are structured to accommodate a feast or famine environment. In an environment where food is scarce most of the time and plentiful for short periods, we eat as much as we can during the plentiful times in order to store energy for the leaner times. Even though overeating in an always plentiful environment is less healthy than moderate eating, not overeating in a feast-and-famine environment is often deadly. \n\nIf you are a primitive human, who takes down a mammoth one night, you will have more food than you can eat. Because digestion systems take resources to maintain and you are not regularly confronted with more food than you can eat, it doesn't make sense to maintain the extra systems required for you to digest as much as you want quickly, so you fill up your systems when you eat.\n\nOnce you are full, your body gets sleepy, that way you can devote as much energy to digesting as quick as possible as you can. After sleeping, your digestion system has mostly cleared (well, further down the pipeline), so you could consume more. Your dead mammoth is still there, and likely still edible. Thus your body gives you an incentive to keep consuming even more during this short period of abundance.\n\nReally, the need to survive through trying situations (like constant feast-or-famine) has royally screwed up our ability to maximize health in more stable situations. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.endocrineweb.com/conditions/type-2-diabetes/type-2-diabetes-causes",
"http://www.diabetes.co.uk/reactive-hypoglycemia.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1firxp | what is the american dream? | I have heard people talking about the American dream a lot, but never really managed to get what it was about. Can you please explain it to me like I am a five year old foreigner? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1firxp/eli5_what_is_the_american_dream/ | {
"a_id": [
"caanqjq",
"caanwr9",
"caap4sw",
"caaql5q",
"caasm26"
],
"score": [
7,
8,
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It's basically just the idea that in America, if you work hard, you can be rich and prosperous.",
"\nThe American Dream is a manufactured belief that if you try hard enough you can accomplish whatever your want. Historically this refers to owning a home, a nice car, a good career, ect.\n\nThis was partially fabricated by early 20th century consumerists as a way for Americans to buy more stuff, usually expensive stuff. This created the idea that you need \"x, y and z to be successful\".\n\ne.g. You want a toy, then you have to be really nice and if you're nice enough you'll get your toy (actual ELI5)",
"Grow up, go to school, get a degree, work every day from 9-5, buy a car, find a wife, buy a house, retire and be happy.\n\n\n\n",
"You can be whatever or whoever you want to be (usually rich) if you work at it. America offers the opportunities, and all you have to do is to work hard at it",
"its the opposite of the caste system, as in there aren't any social restrictions that keep you from reaching the top. the idea was popularized in the 1860's with a series of rags to riches books by horatio alger. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
126axg | how do romney and obama plan to help the economy, and will either plan actually work? | This may be in the wrong place (/r/politics), but I really would like as simple an explanation as possible, and I hear you guys specialize in simple explanations.
I've heard a lot of talk lately about how Romney is just so much better for the economy, but I can't find anywhere that really explains why. Also can y'all suggest any sources of information that aren't obviously biased?
Really I just want some simply explained information that actually has some substance to it. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/126axg/how_do_romney_and_obama_plan_to_help_the_economy/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6sihqb",
"c6sj7al",
"c6sjcui",
"c6sjd4a",
"c6sjihg",
"c6sjzh1",
"c6sljtw",
"c6spybo",
"c6ssix7"
],
"score": [
64,
6,
3,
29,
431,
19,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Simplest possible: Romney believes increasing supply is the key to recovery, Obama believes increasing demand is.\n\nThe [BBC](_URL_0_) are good and unbiased.",
"I am pretty sure that Obama's plans have worked. Stock Market is way up, joblessness is decreasing (it was spinning out of control under Bush), the auto industry is saved, the foreclosure scandal is being mitigated... on and on and on... \n\nThe Romney plan is no different that what caused the mess, with the addition that he is against everything that would have combated the problem... \"Let Detroit Die\"... hardly the rallying cry of an inspiring leader...",
"Although Romney isn't very clear, I think in one of his debates he says that he will limit the amount of tax expenditures someone can claim as a way to decrease the debt without increasing taxes. I'm pretty sure it was the very first question of the second debate.\n\nIt's interesting because those tax expenditures (mortgage, charity, education) have large interests that back their existence. Charity is big business, and if he thinks that the Red Cross/ the people that write off charitable donations will just roll over as he tries to limit the amount that people can claim on their taxes, then I think he has another one coming.\n\nIt's called the submerged state, or the invisible welfare state. It's a concept that Suzanne Mettler wrote about, and it's pretty interesting.",
"Answer: the president does not have the power to affect economy and even the best plans will fail if not backed by the legislative branch of government. ",
"Romney: Keep the richest people in a small tax bracket. They will use all of their extra money to invest in companies and hire poor people.\n\nObama: End the tax cuts for rich people, reduce taxes on poor and middle class people. These people will buy more stuff with their extra money, and companies will hire more people to keep up with increased demand.",
"If you want an unbiased answer then stay away from r/politics. ",
"Romney has shifted his 'plan' so much from the primaries (where he would give the rich everything and wait for the trickle down to miraculously actually work - even though it never did in the 35 years it has been a GOP staple). So who knows what Romneys actual plan is anymore?\n\nObama's plan will try to drive the economy by infrastructure spending and government job creation that then will start to get the private sector hiring. Then you start to dissolve the government stimulated jobs and those people can shift into the private sector because there will be a need for them to fill open positions.\n\nProblem is: Everyone wants a quick fix, and it ain't gonna happen.\n\nIf Americans could unshove their heads from their asses and see this... we wouldn't need to worry about Romney perhaps getting in the White House.\n\nRemember: Romney has been running for President for like 10 years... at this point he will say and do ANYTHING he needs to for that win.",
"When you say biased, you mean \"partisan\". \nFirst you'll have to research each candidate to find out their political stance (good luck, this is difficult enough). Then you'll need to research each Party's philosophy. \nMy largest issue with Democrats is they typically seek to make life \"fair\" and govern as if one person that earns a lot of money somehow owes people that don't earn a lot of money. They tend to be more accepting that citizens struggle based more on personal (poor) decisions or luck. \nRepublicans tend to muck around in citizens personal lives too much (abortion, church, etc). Republicans also tend to govern more like people that don't earn \"much\" money as having made personal choices That reflect their current socio-economic situation. They also believe less about fairness and more about the \"potential\" to succeed being present as not being a life guarantee.",
"I am of the opinion that the president really doesn't have *that* much influence over how the economy does. Things like energy prices and consumer confidence are far more important. I guess if you want to talk about things the president has some modicum of control the discussion would be geared towards tax rates, whether or not the government can create jobs, and whether or not the government can stimulate demand. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/us_and_canada/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
dla6sd | what makes smooth bore cannons accurate, but the same can't be said for rifles? | Learning about modern main battle tanks, some of them have 120mm main guns that have a smooth bore muzzle as opposed to rifling. Historically, muskets and other muzzle loaded rifles weren't considered accurate at anything resembling long or even moderate range. Rifling of the barrels dramatically increased accuracy. Have main battle tanks ever used rifled bores, and if not, how can the smooth bores be accurate enough to effectively engage targets at ranges over 3,000m? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dla6sd/eli5_what_makes_smooth_bore_cannons_accurate_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"f4or0v9",
"f4orzov",
"f4pkqre"
],
"score": [
3,
18,
3
],
"text": [
"The precision of those smoothbore cannons is _significantly_ better than any musket. They’re also computer-controlled to compensate the vehicle movement (be it ocean wavesor land inconsistencies) and aim.\n\nSome tanks use sabot rounds, too, which interact differently with rifled barrels.",
"Rifled bore make the projectile spin, which make it more stable in flight and increase the accuracy. But making the projectile spin isn't the only way to stabilize a projectile. Tanks used rifled gun for a long time, but some specific projectile used by modern tank are better without rifling.\n\nOne of them is the HEAT round is an explosive that shape a jet of molten metal to pierce the tank. HEAT round are more stable in a rifled barrel, but the spinning decrease their effectiveness on target. So in that particular case you could make a case for both rifled or smoothbore gun. \n\nBut the main reason why modern tank use smoothbore today is because of APFSDS. Those are Armor-Piercing, fin-stabilized, discarding Sabot. Those are like arrow, long but narrow with allow them to concentrate their force into a small area which make penetrating easier. You see in the name that it's fin-stabilized, so it doesn't need to spin to stabilize itself, in fact making that round spin would create air resistance on the fin which wouldn't be good. \n\nThe M1 Abrams for exemple used to have a 105mm rifled gun using APDS (Armour Piercing Discarding Sabot). The problem is that APDS had a limit on how narrow you can make the round before it become instable even if you spin it. It's about the ratio of diameter vs lenght, once the projectile is about 6-7 times longer than it's diameter, spinning the projectile just don't do it, so fin were used and for that you need a smoothbore gun.",
"Muskets in general fire a round ball. The ball have bad aerodynamics when if flight and any unsymmetrical part will have a effect on one direction. The did not fit the barrel perfectly because muskets was in general muzzle loaded so you need to be be able to push it down it to load it, this can result in some bouncing in the barrel that reduce accuracy. \nRifled increased accuracy because the spinning make it stable like a gyroscope and any unsymmetrical part will not longer push in one direction but get canceled out because of the rotation.\n\nTank guns are breech loaded so the shell fits perfectly and is of hard precision manufactured stuff not lead that can get deformed when fired . What you fire out of them is not a round ball but [HEAT shell](_URL_2_), [Armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS)](_URL_1_) and some more types that if you look at them all have fins that is used to stabilize there path.\n\nSo they way that they are stabile in the air is just like a arrow. \nYou can see the difference if you drop a arrow or a ball from some height and the effect of wind on each.\n\nTanks used to have rifled cannon in the past. The first smooth bore tank guns was introduced in the 1960 because the long APFSDS projectile, HEAT shells and anti tank missiles fired from the cannon work a lot better with a smooth barrel. The Soviet T-64B main battle tank was the first tank that used that. \n\n\nToday most tank design uses smooth bore guns because APFSDS and HEAT is the best ammunition to defeat other tanks. The fins on the projectile will keep them stable in flight. Fins that deploy or is a part of the projectile make the ammunition more complex so it is nothing you would like to do on small caliber guns. You add the complexity when it is needed like for HEAT even on man portable launchers. There are experiments with [_URL_0_](_URL_0_) \n\nThere are British Challenger 2 because they what to be able to used High-explosive squash head (HESH) that squashes explosible on the target and detonate. It is good against solid amour and bunkers. You can fire APFSDS and HEAT from them by having rotating drive bands, think of a ball bearing, so they do not rotate when fired from rifle gun."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Needlegun",
"https://www.militaryimages.net/media/apfsds.33143/full",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-explosive_anti-tank_warhead#/media/File:125mm_3BK29_HEAT.JPG"
]
] |
|
5677br | why is pressure measured in inches? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5677br/eli5_why_is_pressure_measured_in_inches/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8gvs7x"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's measured in inches of mercury (inHg). \n\nPressure used to be measured compared to how much pressure an inch of mercury in a glass column exerted. Or the other way round, how much a certain pressure moved the mercury. Simply, you have a container of mercury with a tube standing in it. Air pressure pressing down on the pool of mercury forces it up the tube. How far up the tube it goes tells you the pressure in inches of mercury. \n\nOtherwise, it can be measured in psi (pounds per square inch) which is just the imperial version of the metric newtons per square metre. Literally how much force is applied to the area you're measuring. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1g3gt9 | how come we have latin phrases in the english language? | Eg. Quid pro quo. Why not just say the english for that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1g3gt9/eli5_how_come_we_have_latin_phrases_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cagd8uz",
"cagdycc"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"/r/etymology \n\nIf I had to guess, I'd say because it loses a bit of its original meaning and history. All languages have borrowed words from different languages.\n\nFor example, if I said \"huh, deja-vu\" you would know what I meant. If I said \"huh, already seen\" you might wonder what I'm talking about.",
"For many centuries Latin was the only language that was commonly understood across many areas/countries/royal domains in Europe. \n\nIt was used as a religious as well as an academic and sciences language. \n\nIt was little spoken outside of church but much written and read by those with an education. As a result of centuries of use in many locations the same phrases came to be used in many places because the meant the same thing in each location even if the local language was different. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3oehj5 | why have higher lifeforms evolved on land on not on water? | There is more room in the ocean as well as more nutrients. So shouldn't have the higher lifeforms adapted to an oceanic life, rather than move to the land?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3oehj5/eli5_why_have_higher_lifeforms_evolved_on_land_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvwhq2c",
"cvwhwh7",
"cvwhzfo",
"cvwhzzm",
"cvwicjl",
"cvwkv17"
],
"score": [
6,
9,
11,
3,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"I think you should rephrase this question: \"How have higher lifeforms evolved on land and not in water?\"",
"Higher? what's higher? Fish, mammals, birds, bacteria, reptiles, mollusks including plural octopus, reptiles, and so on all exist and thrive in the oceans. As to why a species would ever move onto land, less competition. Whatever went onto land first wouldn't have to compete with other species. Over time the species that went onto land diverged and developed into more and more species, which eventually created a complex ecosystem.",
"There is no such thing as a higher life form except for human prejudice. An amoeba is as successful as a dog.",
"\"More room and more nutrients\" do not necessarily mean that a species will have a better chance to evolve.\n\nAlso, there are \"higher life forms\" in the oceans - cetaceans.\n\nThere's also an issue of rate in which evolutionary changes will alter a species. Marine mammals show low levels of reproduction which lowers the rate at which they'll diversify their genetic pool, I necessity for evolutionary changes.\n\nThe question doesn't really apply, however.\n\nA very large group of mammals have marine ancestors. The majority of hairless mammals evolved from a marine species.\n\nThere is actually a good bit of evidence to support a theory that humans may have evolved from an aquatic species, research the \"aquatic ape theory.\"",
"If by higher you mean intelligent comparable to humans, there are dolphins, octopuses, whales, that are very intelligent ans probably other sea creatures that I'm not aware of. There are very complex life forms in the ocean.",
"Putting aside the issues with this question raised in other comments, I would say \"evolutionary pressure\". More nutrients and room would require less change. Less nutrients and an incredibly variety of environmental conditions and limitations on land would necessitate more adaptability, so if we're defining 'higher lifeforms' as tool and language using alpha-predators it makes sense that those would appear on land first - there was more pressure to."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6f46ie | how did humanity survive in nature for over 100,000 years in nature with such helpless, useless babies that work as beacons for predators with the amount of noise they make? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6f46ie/elif_how_did_humanity_survive_in_nature_for_over/ | {
"a_id": [
"dif9vte",
"dif9x2z",
"difa7pa",
"difbg1l",
"difbvdh",
"difdg88",
"diff0kc",
"diffp6d",
"difghk1",
"difh4yr",
"difhnh2",
"difhw4c",
"difhzuh",
"difia5r",
"dififj2",
"difii5c",
"difio6c",
"difjjbl",
"digaklw"
],
"score": [
17,
12,
160,
739,
10,
18,
232,
21,
4,
11,
3,
13,
4,
6,
4,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"We are very, very smart and form tight-knit communities which are able to care for and protect children. We also have fire and weapons, which make predators think twice about attacking large groups of us.",
"Predators are generally not attracted to the sound of a crying baby. They know it's a human and they know the parents are at the top of the food chain for a reason. We are the only species who use weapons. (I'm sure someone will find an exception however.)",
"Many baby animals are just as helpless as a human. Look how many animals just sit around *as a defenseless egg*?\n\nBabies and children always would have been vulnerable to predation, violence, disease, just like every other animal, but humans live in groups and are capable of making fire, weapons, choosing safe places to make their home (like a cave, hut, etc). \n\nAnatomically modern humans are the absolute top of the food chain, even if some small number of babies were killed by a wild animal, a whole group of humans would have scared the bejeesus out of pretty much everything",
"Short summary of human evolution to this day.\n\nBecause we out-thought them. Many human babies, as weak and helpless as they are for so many years, definitely did die by tooth and claw. But, on average, their parents were smarter than the things that wanted to eat them.\n\nSo they were able to defend them for years with basic logic, planned ahead to have enough food to feed their useless mouths in winter, and grew and prospered.\n\nOver time those brains became even bigger and more useful. Crude clubs were fashioned to equal any tooth or claw, and battles were won. Dirt walls were piled up and men with clubs were posted to keep watch, and no mere animal could approach without detection.\n\nGradually we learned about our environment, and due to evolution of our vocal chords we were able to form language to pass down tales. Tales that told that if you spit out the fruit seed and pressed it into the earth it would be fruit for your children to eat. And so we had more fruit than any other animal could ever hope for.\n\nWe won so many battles and killed so many lions and tigers and bears, oh my, that they eventally evolved to fear us. A bear will not come after a human child unless it is starving to death (which isn't that uncommon). Better to eat poison than to have your entire genetic line hunted to extinction in an orgy of vengeance.\n\nLacking any animal that could stop us we quickly colonized the entire Earth. In some cases wiping out smarter (at the time) rival homonid species that didn't breed as fast (Neanderthals).\n\nEventally there was no one to turn on but ourselves. We quickly adapted to war with even bigger brains and specialized bodies. Northern European men have massively enlarged upper bodies, full of muscle, able to swing a sword and carry heavy metal armor (on average).\n\nNow we are adapting to peace. No longer does the mighty arm win the argument. You have to remain calm and talk things through. You don't want trouble with the government. Eventually, over hundreds of years, that will too breed itself into our bones.\n\nAnd we are losing the ability to operate as a biological organism without technology. Brains are so incredabily useful that women can now give birth to babies with brains two sizes to big for their hips. Surgical c-section has enabled a new era of expansion in brain sizes, with 30% more women since 1950 in America birthing babies with brains too large to survive without knife and antibiotics.\n\n",
"Humans are a species that lives in groups, crafts weapons, and builds shelters. Even our ancient ancestors did this at a rudimentary level. We do not hide from predators, we fight them and prevent them from getting to us. As such our infants being noisy are not much of an issue. They have the adults there to protect them. ",
"If you read some of the tribal stories written by first people you may read in a few of them a strategy that moms used to protect themselves and their babies from harm. \n\nThey would partially smoother their child every time they cried. Soon the child learned to not do that at a very young age, read a few days to a week or so, and if they didn't the child may be abandoned or totally smothered. Now this sounds brutal but it is better than being eaten or killed by rivals. \n\nNot saying how common this was, but the knowledge was passed down in my family from my grandmother, she didn't practice it but her grandmother did. \n\nEdit, auto correct",
"There's a really good book on the topic of mother/infant evolution called Mother Nature by Sarah Hrdy. As I remember, she's a primatologist as well as an anthropologist so she looks at all primate parental behaviors to draw conclusions about primitive humans. As other have noted, most babies are pretty helpless so humans aren't an exception there. But two points Hrdy made that stood out to me the most.\n \nOne is the importance of alloparenting in primates. As they say, it takes a village to raise a child and for primates thats literally true. An entire troop is dedicated to helping the young survive, not just parents. \n\nAnd two, many assumptions we make about what a human baby does are inaccurate. You're right that extended crying would not be a good survival technique but more primitive cultures tend to have more peaceful babies, partly because they're less colicky (I've heard this is because they dont lie babies down, which leads to acid reflux because the flap in their esophagus isn't fully formed?) and they have many cultural practices to keep babies pacified, like someone always holding the baby, nursing on demand, swaddling etc. \n\nThere are some writings from early Appalachia where the white explorers specifically mention how peaceful and quiet the babies of the Native Americans are. One of them even describes how (shockingly!) a baby would cry while on his mothers back and she would expose her breast, slip him under her arm, and continue with her work. I believe it was Anne Newport Royal who wrote about this.\n\nSimilar things could be said about babys' reflexes. Obviously they were useful at some time so we can't make assumptions that the babies we see in modern culture reflect how babies have always been.",
"In some ways, your view of babies may be skewed as you only see them as they are today. Babies have adapted to making lots of noise in order to get food, attention, etc. I watched an episode of I shouldn't be [alive] (_URL_0_) where the family got caught in a blizzard. The child was 5-months old. Instead of screaming the kid got very quiet and the parents were terrified to open the duffel bag they were carrying him in. You find out at the end that the baby went almost into hibernation and young humans are actually able to handle that type of situation better than adults. I believe his name was Clayton Stapola or something similar. \n\nInfant babies, even today, prefer to be swaddled and carried around (think of all of the adorable baby pictures on facebook of the kid sleeping while the parent has them in some sort of transport on their body). I believe it is a natural and common thing that has been used for a very long time. So the parents, as stated, outsmarted the predators but also kept them close. ",
"The fussier the baby the smarter the parents have to be raise it. So the parents that actually keep their babies alive in tough conditions are actually smarter then those that don't. Coupled with the fact that babies with bigger heads are smarter it's beneficial to have them born before they are totally ready. This leads to smaller head size at birth and less mortality in pregnancy. ",
"IANA anthropologist so I'm only surmising about the noise level based on experience with my own Indian family. Indian babies seem to cry a lot less than those in the west because there are just far more people around to look after them as soon as any problem arises. The parents are less stressed because they know they can hand the baby off to some or other aunt if they don't have time to deal with something. ",
"Because they are actually bait for predators and the dads kill whatever shows up for dinner.",
"Short answer: Societies. \n\nIt literally does take a village to raise a child. Since societies are mandatory to protect our young, we were forced to form the groups that led to human dominance of earth. A small group can work, a large group works much better. \n\nThe real question is how could we have survived *without* useless children to force us to work together? ",
"They'd rather make a meal out of someone who foolishly goes out into the open alone. A solitary human, (even an experienced hunter) is an easier target than a well-protected baby. If the baby crying is coming from a village or known humans' territory, they'd most likely not care.",
"If you reel back time to 50 to 100 thousand years ago a few things stand out. There were several humanoid races present on the planet. Neanderthal, Denisovan, Cro-magnon, and others all duking it out between them as to who is gonna be top dog. At the time Neanderthals were declining, humans were domesticating wolves as hunting partners. Humans and neanderthal preyed on everything they could kill, mastodon, auroch, and other large prey. We hunted down the ones we thought dangerous and wiped them out if we could. The hunter animals learned to fear humans in their DNA 40 thousand years ago with few exceptions like snakes, perhaps grizzly bears and polar bears, even lions and tigers seem to avoid human prey, It is not a survival choice to eat human meat.\n\nThen there is the baby itself. In old style primitive society they are remarkably quiet, and the screech of an alarmed toddler usually scares the predator away while the guys with spears and clubs come scurrying with blood in their eye.",
"It's better to think of the baby as part of a mother/ infant dyad, rather than as an individual. The infant was probably carried at all times, and some anthropologist argue that crawling is a modern experience as a baby would not have been put down. \nAll larger primates have similarly dependent young, though the one big difference is that the human baby cannot hold on to the mother. This certainly makes transport more difficult, but, on the positve side, the human baby is relatively small, compared to most primate young. \nAs is common in modern hunter gatheres, caloric limitations and prolonged nursing would have limited ovulation in adult women and, thus, a mother would not have had more than one young child at a time. \nAll the arguments about brain size and outsmarting are speculation bordering on fantasy. Modern human behavior postdates dependent primate young by hundreds of thousand years. ",
"This is a brilliant question. I always thought it weird that a giraffe baby could fall a couple stories at birth and literally walk away. But a human baby...... take their popsicle away and holy shit, they might as well be shooting flares off. ",
"Pretty much what everyone has already said, any predator that tried to enter a camp would be descended upon by a murder-nado of spears and torches. If humans are good at one thing, it's killing the shit out of stuff. \n\nImagine you're the predator and as soon as you get close to were the delicious sounding meat sack is a horde of fifty pissed off, screeching moms and dads waving bright heat sticks and pokey hurt sticks, you probably wouldn't go back",
"What predators? Top of the food pyramid, homie",
"Like any other animal preparing for offspring, Humans find places to settle with their babies and find ways of guarding themselves. the only difference is that our development time is a little longer but we make up for it by being apex predators and group forming."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0914620/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4ogysy | what does non-binary genders really mean? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ogysy/eli5_what_does_nonbinary_genders_really_mean/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4ci7tv",
"d4cicl9",
"d4cjeug"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I disagree with gender being socially constructed. In my opinion *gender roles* are socially constructed, but *gender identity* is not, it is an innate sense of self. As a trans person, my need to transition wasn't because I wanted to do/wear \"boy things\", but because of the way I felt about my physical appearance. How people saw me and interacted with me bothered me as well, but because it was a reminder of my physical form. Other people's experience can differ though. \n\nSo to answer your question, people who are non-binary don't feel wholly male or female. It's not about how a person presents themself/dresses/acts, but how they feel internally. Presenting in a gender non-conforming manner is one way that some non-binary people find helps them feel more comfortable, but not all do. \n\n(Disclaimer: binary male trans person) ",
"There's a difference between gender ROLES and gender IDENTITY. Gender identity is how one person identifies as. Not everyone perfectly identifies with what society defines as a man, (not everyone is the same) and there are variances.\n\nGender ROLES are what is constructed by society. But again, not everyone perfectly fulfills the roles that society designates for them.\nEveryone is different, is exposed to different environments, culture, and upbringing, so there will be variances in gender identity and gender roles\n\n\nThis video explains genders, sexual orientation, etc, really really well \n\n_URL_0_\n",
"When everyone one agrees, send me the CliffsNotes version. Everyone seems to have their own convoluted description. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXAoG8vAyzI&index=82&list=PLr9oFm024LHohEvYNyxDYeiKDToeEUs27"
],
[]
] |
||
biur8x | why can't you use hot water to boil water for cooking? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/biur8x/eli5_why_cant_you_use_hot_water_to_boil_water_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"em36zph",
"em378aq",
"em37c5w",
"em37lcb",
"em37ly9"
],
"score": [
12,
7,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"There is more likely to be debris, nastiness, and funk in the water coming from the water heater.\n\nA tankless water heater would be fine.",
"thats false. it doesnt matter whether its hot or cold. \nsome may say its better to start with cold water cause hot water will contain more dissolved minerals from your pipes vs cold water and may cause an off-taste in your food.",
"There is an urban legend that cold water boils faster than hot water, which is the opposite of the (true) idea that hot water can freeze faster than cold water.\n\nUltimately the only (legitimate) reason to use cold instead of hot would be due to impurities in the water. If you're using some kind of filter or have a tankless heater, those concerns are likely irrelevant.",
"The pot has to heat up too in order to boil water. If you start with 50 degree tap water (on the edge of the food safety \"danger zone\" where bacteria grow quickly) it'll heat to boiling temps at about the same rate as the pot. If you start with 120 degree water (standard water heater temp), you're right in the middle of the food safety \"danger zone\" *and* still waiting for your pot to get at least as hot as the water.\n\nIdeally, the water in your hot water tank isn't full of bacteria. Realistically, whatever you're putting in the water is.",
"This is a myth, left over from the days when pipe solder had lead in it, and hot water is more able to leech that lead into the water. Nowadays we don’t have lead in solder (and lots of new construction doesn’t even use solder) so this is not a concern."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
44a018 | saudi arabia and oil prices | Eli5 if oil is Saudi Arabia's main source of wealth then why did opec drive down the price of oil by not capping production? They know the west is investing in alternative energy so why give it away now? Also why would the west rely on oil for so long knowing the middle East has complete control over oil prices? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/44a018/eli5_saudi_arabia_and_oil_prices/ | {
"a_id": [
"czorait"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Saudi Arabia can produce oil incredibly cheaply, unlike other countries such as the United States. By pushing prices down so low other countries can't afford to produce oil as it is no longer profitable, therefore once Saudi Arabia increases its prices again it will have a larger market share and more profits. In addition to more profits it will have greater influence. Saudi Arabia is also in a proxy war with Iran, by reducing oil prices Iran won't be able to rely on oil income."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
uzgkn | difference between clinical and scientifically proven | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/uzgkn/eli5_difference_between_clinical_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4zzyxb"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"If these are terms you've heard from marketing, then _neither_ really holds any weight until you actually examine those studies."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5uid0a | if vehicles are mostly dangerous because of the impact of metal, then why aren't they, or atleast the outer exterior, made of soft materials like foam? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5uid0a/eli5_if_vehicles_are_mostly_dangerous_because_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddu809t",
"ddu87nz"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Getting hit by 4,000 pounds of foam at 60mph would still kill you pretty dead.\n\nVehicles are dangerous because they are large heavy objects that move fast. The fact that they are made of metal has very little to do with it.",
"Because then the outside foam would be getting wet, moldy and falling off. Your 4 yr old would have removed half of it, your cat would claw half of it off. You'd always be replacing your car foam. Its just not durable.\n\nAnd in any case, if you're getting injured or killed in a human-car collision its not because the outside of the car is hard or soft. Its because of the sheer amount of kinetic energy that causes sudden acceleration to various - and possibly now separate - parts of your body. Foam car shells might turn a death at 15 mph into an injury, but getting clipped by a padded car doing 50... you're going to go flying regardless. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2losm9 | why do extremely profitable companies still engage in shady practices? | For example, Boeing and Pfizer are two I can come up with in recent times. Boeing with its quality issues with the 787 and Pfizer with false marketing. And yet these companies still make billions of dollars every year. Why don't they just spend the extra time and money to ensure quality and not deceive their customers? It seems like it would be better in the long term for the company's reputation and the costs of fixing their mistakes and dealing with the government surely offset some of the profits they made by taking shortcuts. Are companies just inherently that greedy? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2losm9/eli5_why_do_extremely_profitable_companies_still/ | {
"a_id": [
"clwqofo",
"clws1ke",
"clws3va",
"clwswzi",
"clwtj16"
],
"score": [
17,
3,
2,
4,
4
],
"text": [
"When doing something illegal and paying a fine is more profitable than doing something legal, it's just the cost of doing business. Businesses are rarely required to admit any wrongdoing, and there are no real repercussions.",
"In the case of being, I strongly suspect that they really want their planes to work correctly, and just don't understand what's wrong.",
"How do you think they became extremely profitable?\n\n\"are companies that greedy?\"\n\nPretty naive view of the world, but they all have boards of directors and shareholders to answer to, who don't give a fuck if you make the best engines in the world, if you lose money next quarter, you cut corners the following quarter.",
"Because those shady practices are what makes them profit. ",
"Greedy CEO's would still kill their own mother if it meant a 5% stock increase"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
94e9mu | why do roads continued to be made of asphalt give its proclivity to deform, and thus need constant repair? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/94e9mu/eli5_why_do_roads_continued_to_be_made_of_asphalt/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3kcg76",
"e3kcn1r",
"e3kdbki",
"e3ke5r6",
"e3kphk2"
],
"score": [
29,
2,
5,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Asphalt is incredibly cheap.\n\nIt's also fairly durable and doesn't get too slick when it's wet.",
"Because it's really cheap. Concrete costs far more but lasts longer; so much longer that it is the cheaper long-term option. The problem is that most people lack the long-term dedication to actually put that kind of money up front.",
"The closest alternative to Asphalt Concrete is regular Concrete. This takes far longer to cure (months instead of a week), cement is more expensive than Bitumen, and has the same flaws (potholes, cracking due to weather conditions).\n\nConcrete is more resistant and costs less to maintain, but the upfront cost isn’t worth it.",
"The ground isn't as solid as it seems. It moves, expands and shrinks. Asphalt is good at adapting to these situations. You think it's cracking is bad, but it typically can last years before reaching this point. A more rigid material would take longer to put down and then wouldn't last very long.",
"Asphalt is cheaper to install but breaks down faster. Concrete cost more upfront but last much longer. They use asphalt because it will break down and need repair. Because of this it creates jobs and work for people. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5re7tw | how can alternative cellular service providers "borrow" verizon or at & t's infrastructure and offer lower prices but the same doesn't happen with cable and internet providers? | Are the laws different? Is it easier to lease cellular coverage than cable? Maybe the cable infrastructure is more valuable since there is a direct line to most residences? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5re7tw/eli5_how_can_alternative_cellular_service/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd6mnio"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Major Internet Service Providers (ISPs) like AT & T and Verizon are actually required to provide wholesale access to their DSL network / services for the purpose of allowing other smaller / third-party ISPs to compete in the market and offer their own internet service to customers.\n\nThis is how companies like [DSL Extreme](_URL_0_) are able to offer internet service to customers throughout the United States in both AT & T and Verizon regions.\n\nHowever, in the United States, the FCC regulations that mandate this type of wholesale network access only apply to basic ADSL service offerings. \n\nThis means that companies like AT & T and Verizon only have to provide smaller / third-party ISPs with access to 6-8 Mbps DSL lines to customers. Obviously this presents a problem because most major ISPs now offer much higher bandwidth ADSL2+, VDSL, cable, or fiber services that are much faster. \n\nAs a result, these smaller / third-party ISPs can't really compete with the DSL lines they can rent from AT & T and Verizon which are both low-bandwidth and costly (the wholesale rates in many cases exceed retail rates for the equivalent service offering by the major ISPs).\n\nSo, there is a regulatory system and framework in place designed to drive competition in the market, but it's completely ineffective at this point because the service offerings are just so bad in comparison to the major ISP offerings.\n\nOther countries like Canada and the UK have solved this problem by:\n\n1. Forcing ISPs to open up their broadband networks for wholesale access, including ADSL2+, VDSL, Cable, and Fiber networks\n2. Regulating the wholesale pricing for line rental etc. so that the wholesale rates are reflective of actual costs to the ISP providing the network infrastructure, and as such, allowing smaller / third-party ISPs to offer competitive pricing that is usually cheaper than the equivalent service plans offered by the major ISPs"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.dslextreme.com/dsl/residential"
]
] |
|
2a9zno | why does acrobat reader suck so hard and crash so often? | It's considered the premiere pdf software, but it has trouble just opening files, let alone more than one. Scrolling leads to system hangs. The program crashes periodically even when you're not really doing much that stresses it.
Is the issue a simple bit of code that IT pros are familiar with, or is it just buggy for no good reason? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2a9zno/eli5_why_does_acrobat_reader_suck_so_hard_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ciszr85"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's essentially a result of the PDF format. PDF started as a way to send documents with full formatting between machines/printers without the risk of it looking different either end. Then people liked the idea of the non-editable / looks the same everywhere format and wanted more.\n\nNow it does loads of things - most of which you've probably never used. Links, bookmarks, layers can be used to organise - you can highlight add notes and digitally sign things - you can even assign forms with buttons to send responses and lots more besides. In short it gets complicated. And as the standard author Adobe supports all this stuff, which probably makes their system more complicated and harder to test then many others. So yes its the 'premier' but only because it does everything. Which also makes it less stable (in general) then many other readers. Use those if you find they work better, you'll probably never notice what's missing...\n\nAlthough, with adobe reader you can see video and sounds in a pdf. [I've just put some in this](_URL_1_). (Download the pdf top left & click icons to play)\n\nYou can even view 3d files in a pdf. See [that here](_URL_0_."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://adobe.ly/1kFIKIa(http://thevirtualheart.org/3dpdf/3dpdf.html)",
"http://adobe.ly/1oDp4aB"
]
] |
|
jk239 | passwords and cryptography and encryption | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jk239/eli5_passwords_and_cryptography_and_encryption/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2cs0n5",
"c2cs0n5"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"This can be a very broad topic. I'll focus on some common ways you see these technologies used on the Internet and try and keep it as simple as possible. There is a lot to this topic if you want to learn more than this high level overview.\n\nPasswords are used to prove you are who you say you are to a computer. It's something only you would know, so this is how it uniquely identifies you. It's rare for your actual password to be stored on a remote computer as you remember it. It is usually sent through a type of math formula that changes it to look like a random bunch of letters, numbers and symbols, sometimes called a hash. Every time you use your password to log into a computer or website, what you type goes back through the same formula and the remote computer compares the result of that formula with the hash it stored when your account was created to make sure they match.\n\nCryptography and encryption techniques are used to secure data transmissions over the Internet. For instance, if you go to a bank or online shop, you will often see \"https\" in your address bar and possibly some kind of icon on the screen that lets you know you are using a secure connection.\n\nThis connection uses what is called public key cryptography to secure the data going between your computer and the remote website. The principal behind public key cryptography is that you have two separate keys for the data. One key, the public key, is used to encrypt or \"lock\" the data going from your web browser to the remote website. This key only encrypts data, that's why it's safe for anyone to have it. Back on the computer running the website is a private key that is used to decrypt or \"unlock\" the data from your computer. Only the server running the website has this key, it has to remain secure.\n\nThink if it like this. You wan to give your friend something important. He sends you a box and a padlock (the public key) and keeps the key for the padlock with him (the private key). You put the item you want to give him in the box and lock it with the padlock. You then mail it to him. No one can get into the box while it's being mailed because it's been locked. When your friend receives the box in the mail, he uses the key to unlock the padlock and retrieve the item you sent him.",
"This can be a very broad topic. I'll focus on some common ways you see these technologies used on the Internet and try and keep it as simple as possible. There is a lot to this topic if you want to learn more than this high level overview.\n\nPasswords are used to prove you are who you say you are to a computer. It's something only you would know, so this is how it uniquely identifies you. It's rare for your actual password to be stored on a remote computer as you remember it. It is usually sent through a type of math formula that changes it to look like a random bunch of letters, numbers and symbols, sometimes called a hash. Every time you use your password to log into a computer or website, what you type goes back through the same formula and the remote computer compares the result of that formula with the hash it stored when your account was created to make sure they match.\n\nCryptography and encryption techniques are used to secure data transmissions over the Internet. For instance, if you go to a bank or online shop, you will often see \"https\" in your address bar and possibly some kind of icon on the screen that lets you know you are using a secure connection.\n\nThis connection uses what is called public key cryptography to secure the data going between your computer and the remote website. The principal behind public key cryptography is that you have two separate keys for the data. One key, the public key, is used to encrypt or \"lock\" the data going from your web browser to the remote website. This key only encrypts data, that's why it's safe for anyone to have it. Back on the computer running the website is a private key that is used to decrypt or \"unlock\" the data from your computer. Only the server running the website has this key, it has to remain secure.\n\nThink if it like this. You wan to give your friend something important. He sends you a box and a padlock (the public key) and keeps the key for the padlock with him (the private key). You put the item you want to give him in the box and lock it with the padlock. You then mail it to him. No one can get into the box while it's being mailed because it's been locked. When your friend receives the box in the mail, he uses the key to unlock the padlock and retrieve the item you sent him."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
dvvkdc | why does water dissolve the tide pod from the outside, but the laundry detergent doesn't dissolve it from the inside? | Currently sitting in the laundromat | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dvvkdc/eli5_why_does_water_dissolve_the_tide_pod_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"f7ey7i0",
"f7f3vrh",
"f7f74sv"
],
"score": [
9,
36,
5
],
"text": [
"Because the outside is dissolved by water, and detergent isn't water. Different things react differently because, chemistry.",
"the outer packet is water soluble but the detergent itself isn't high enough in water concentration to break it, your average detergent has a number of ingredients, as you add it the viscosity, density, ph, etc all change. so the packet is chemically designed specifically to keep laundry sauce inside until water is exposed outside.",
"I know this! I have a patent for a similar product that contains body wash instead of laundry detergent.\n\nThe film is called poly vinyl alcohol (PVA). The soap inside of PVA can contain water but only a small amount, based on the thickness of the PVA. This is known as an aqueous solution where water is a solvent. Most soaps and detergents contain 60 to 70 percent water, so the soap in pod is much different (highly concentrated) than in the bottle.\n\nAlso, certain surfactants (the main ingredient in soap) don't play nice with PVA, so they need to be substituted.\n\nFYI - there is also an edible version of PVA"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7uwv3i | what is cannibidiol (cbd) and why is it seemingly coming out of nowhere as an exceptional drug for many diseases and chronic illnesses, as well as improving all around focus and decreasing anxiety? | This so called miracle drug has recently become a hot topic among the pharmaceutical community and I'm skeptic as to its advertised uses—it just seems to good to be true. Are there any downsides to CBD that are pushed under the rug as it becomes synthesized for sale by companies like Eli Lilly and Company?
Edit: Grammar | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7uwv3i/eli5_what_is_cannibidiol_cbd_and_why_is_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"dtnt7o9",
"dtnur5u",
"dto0ycl"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
5
],
"text": [
"I probably would not explain anything about marijuana to a five year old, but, it's a component of marijuana. There are two \"main\" parts, THC and CBD. THC is the \"weed high\" portion and CBD is the medical stuff you mentioned, in a very general sense.\n\nAn older-than-5 explanation (that I yanked from Google for you): _URL_0_\n\n > Are there any downsides to CBD that are pushed under the rug\n\nI don't think they'd be swept under the rug as much as not yet known. It's new.",
"Previous statement covers it all, but I'd just like to reinforce that last part: alot is still unknown when it comes to the beneficial/negative sides of CBD.",
"Ok, daily CBD user here. I will try and give my 2 cents. \n\nI take CBD gummies daily for pain. From experience, it has worked better than ibuprofen or tylenol; but not as well as an opiate. The wonderful thing about CBD is that I can manage my pain without having to take opiates. (In my situation, dealing with a little pain is a much better alternative.)\n\nUnfortunately, medications react with people differently. What works for you may not work for someone else. If you look at the back of a prescription bottle it will list a ton of side effects. Just because a side effect is rare, doesn't mean it hasn't happened. \n\nMy concerns with CBD is that the extraction process is hit or miss. Some companies cut corners and leave impurities with the extract (which is not good). When you purchase a medication you should only worry about that particular substance. Hence, why I am for synthesized CBD from pharmaceutical companies. \n\nI believe that we need to have more extensive research, but also make sure it is available to those who need it. No one should have to beg a doctor for a script for CBD.\n\nThe only side effects I have experienced is drowsiness. Not because I was warned, but from trial and error. I wouldn't look at it as a miracle drug, but more like a much better alternative for the arsenal of medications available to us today. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.leafscience.com/2017/11/22/thc-cbd-difference/"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
400boc | why a video load bar shows minutes ahead are loaded, yet the video still pauses to buffer. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/400boc/eli5_why_a_video_load_bar_shows_minutes_ahead_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyqjuz4"
],
"score": [
19
],
"text": [
"It depends on the site, but I'll look at it purely from a video encoding standpoint...\n\nVideo online is highly compressed and packaged, usually with H.264 or Ogg/vorbis, which are different standards. These standards save space by not saving every pixel of every frame, instead only saving the pixels that have changed from the frame before. Every so often in a video, \"key frames\" are saved that contain the entire picture. When you try to scrub to a specific frame of a video, your computer needs to grab the most recent keyframe, and compute all the subsequent frames until it can render the exact frame you want. This process can take a moment, which might be the delay you experience.\n\n*edit typo"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1od3fc | please explain what forces makes this magnet retard through a copper tube. | _URL_0_
This is a magnet getting dropped through a copper tube.
What makes it slow down like that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1od3fc/eli5_please_explain_what_forces_makes_this_magnet/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccqvnnx"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Induction. As the magnet falls through the tube, it induces an electrical current, which produces a magnetic field that is opposite that of the magnet and thus slows its fall.\n"
]
} | [] | [
"http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net/photo/aEw2Vxo_460sa.gif"
] | [
[]
] |
|
3qe56e | why do people sometimes change the first letter when they talk? (i.e. she wanted to srink some doda) | Like what happens in the brain or mouth that lets that happen? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qe56e/eli5_why_do_people_sometimes_change_the_first/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwedlqh"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I don't know what causes it, but it's called spoonerism and it's named after an English doctor or vicar (I may be wrong) who used to do it a lot (not deliberately).\n\nI don't know his first name, but his surname was Spooner."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1q9m1k | what does mach mean? | I understand that its the ratio of an object to the speed of sound, but how is it applied? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1q9m1k/eli5what_does_mach_mean/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdakfam"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"If you're travelling at Mach 1, then you're travelling at exactly the speed of sound.\n\nMach 0.5 is half the speed of sound. Mach 2 is twice the speed of sound. And so on."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5r5jdq | what is a constitutional crisis? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5r5jdq/eli5_what_is_a_constitutional_crisis/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd4mdfc"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Generally speaking, no constitution is perfect. And, even a great constitution is not self-enforcing---no matter how beautifully written or clear, people still need to abide by it, more or less. \n\nWhen you have a situation that the constitution doesn't appear to cover or where part of the government refuses to abide by an accepted interpretation of the Constitution, you have what is usually termed a constitutional crisis. Sometimes, it doesn't have to be about the written constitution itself, but can involve violation of a widely accepted \"unwritten rule\" (sometimes called a \"norm\").\n\nFor example, say that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a law was unconstitutional, but the president continued to enforce that law. You'd have a crisis because technically, by the most widely accepted approach to the judiciary in the U.S., the Supreme Court has the final word. But if the President simply refused the order, it creates a crisis, which the Constitution doesn't provide a clear way to resolve. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2vskqz | how did someone originally assign value to the different variables of time? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vskqz/eli5_how_did_someone_originally_assign_value_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cokjj2t",
"cokjkft",
"cokjr1x"
],
"score": [
46,
2,
10
],
"text": [
"Do you mean units of time?\n\nLike seconds?\n\nWell, days, years and lunar months are pretty easy to observe.\n\nNow, 12 is a great number its better than ten. You can only divide 10 by 10, 5, 2, 1 but you can divide 12 by 12, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1. As multiples of 12, 60 & 24 are also useful numbers.\n\nSo a day was divided into 24 hours and then hours into 60 minutes and minutes into 60 seconds.",
"Well, we started with the basics. We first observed day and night along with seasons\n\nEdit: more info\n\nFrom there we went on to observe that the moon functioned in regular cycles then we noticed a correlation between lunar cycles and seasons. We counted how many days there were per cycle and how many per season. From there we began to try and group these large quantities of time. As centuries passed we started to measure smaller and smaller amounts of time, further dividing it.",
"Ancient civilizations, such as the Egyptians, Sumerians, and Indians, divided the days up into 24 hours. Except when they did it, it was dividing daytime into 12 parts, and night time into 12 parts. Due to the variable length of daylight vs. nighttime, this would cause their \"hours\" to be longer or shorter depending on the season.\n\nDivision of an hour into sixtieths (minutes) and further (seconds) comes from Babylonians, who used 60 as the base for their math (instead of 10)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2brybn | why doesn't japan allow dual citizenship? | My mother is Japanese, and my father is British, meaning I am a citizen of Japan, and the United Kingdom. Under current Japanese law, I will need to give up my My Japanese citizenship or my British. I would be really upset about giving up either citizenships. Since Japanese is in Demographic Transition stage 5, and the population is decreasing why doesn't the Japanese government allow dual citizenship? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2brybn/eli5why_doesnt_japan_allow_dual_citizenship/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj8b2r6",
"cj8d7kr",
"cj8gikx"
],
"score": [
13,
4,
10
],
"text": [
"to put it in simple words:\n\nA government/country is essentially nothing without it's citizens, so they want to keep you.\n\nAnother reason is that it's an awful lot of bureaucracy if you have multiple citizenships and travel around and something happens etc.\n\nActually being allowed to have multiple citizenships is is the exception.",
"It's not all that unusual. Dual citizenship was banned in the U.S. up until 1967.",
"Not ELI5 but FYI; if you remain a citizen of both countries neither country will force you to relinquish your citizenship. Just travel in Japan with your Japanese passport and everywhere else with your British passport. You shouldn't have any trouble at the border. You will be in the wrong on paper, but it is unlikely anyone will do anything about it. Source: My wife is a dual citizen (admittedly US - Japan not UK - Japan) and travels to and from Japan twice a year. Good luck collecting dual pensions though :-( I would just pick and pay into one system."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
fwe7a3 | why can't ip addresses be used instead of mac addresses | I've searched it up multiple times, and have looked through quite a few ELI5's but I can't seem to understand it. What I have figured out is that when a frame is being sent it contains the final destination's IP and the source IP of the device at the very beginning. It also includes the source MAC address and the destination MAC address but of the next node that the frame will hop to. My confusion is why a MAC address is used to identify the next node the frame has to hop to instead of an IP address | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fwe7a3/eli5_why_cant_ip_addresses_be_used_instead_of_mac/ | {
"a_id": [
"fmnvj3z",
"fmo2pof"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Because It happens at different layers of the network stack. MAC addresses are the Ethernet layer of the connection. An IP frame can transit many different types of network connections, not just Ethernet. Examples include point-to-point serial links (if you were using a dial up modem, this is what you’d be using), ATM/SONET, or you can even transport them over ancient things like ARCNet or Token Ring. But the IP address and frame remain the same no matter how it is sent.",
"ELI5: mac addresses and other similar services help support IP for purposes that IP was intentionally designed not to perform.\n\n\nDetails:\nMac addresses aren't needed... on point to point circuits. Serial encapsulation can be used for error checking instead with no layer 2 addressing. \n Layer 2 protocols provide services to layer 3 as I'll detail below.\n\nLet's build a theoretical world where there is no layer two protocol. You plug your computer into a router (no switches without layer 2). Just for the sake of argument, let's pretend these \"switches\" learn ip addresses instead of mac's. Oh, wait, your computer gets an ip address with dhcp.\n\nHmm, with no mac address, there's no way to differentiate your 0.0.0.0 src ip from every other computer lusting for an ip address. You now have to statically configure every address for every client in your network.\n\nAdditionally, ip is not the only layer 3 protocol! You also have ipv6. If you really want to go back, you also have other layer three protocols like appletalk. For every address family you provision, do you want your switch to have to learn every address? How about vendors!? When they develop their NICs, they need a layer 2 protocol address, because they dont know what kind of layer 3 overlay you are going to build.\n\nAdditionally, ip doesnt perform error checking because it counts on layer 2 protocols to perform that function. Now you can't detect errors for udp traffic if layer 2 doesn't exist.\n\nLastly, think about how a packet is forwarded in the network. The src and dst ip never change for a natless flow. What this means, is that every hop in your path (routers), down to the cheapo access switch servicing your corner of the floor, now has to have every route in the entire network installed. If simply tracking multiple address families for the directly connected links didnt kill your router memory before, your access device resources (both CPU and memory) are certainly overloaded now.\n\nHopefully, this helps you begin to see how layer 2 protocols provide support to layer three protocols."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
bdr68u | why do hamsters find hamster wheel so fun? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bdr68u/eli5_why_do_hamsters_find_hamster_wheel_so_fun/ | {
"a_id": [
"el08lbr"
],
"score": [
164
],
"text": [
"In nature, hamsters have large territories and are largely solitary dwellers. We keep them in tiny cages and often with other hamsters, which goes completely against their nature. They would naturally run around marking vast territories (which accounts for their strong odor), mating prolifically (because they are food for lots of other animals), and generally being rodents.\n\nWhen they hop on the wheel, it lets them at least vaguely fulfill their natural need for running some distance. It's not much but it's all they have."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
oh8ie | why doesn't acid melt a glass container? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/oh8ie/eli5_why_doesnt_acid_melt_a_glass_container/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3h8mlj"
],
"score": [
27
],
"text": [
"Some acids do. Hydrofluoric acid, for example, will eat through glass and can be used for glass etching. Other acids can break down glass under certain conditions. A Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) would list the exactly how a chemical should be stored.\n\nMost acids, however, do not react with glass. Most substances, in fact, do not react strongly with glass. This is because the molecules that make up glass are so tightly bound that they are unable to trade or combine electrons with other substances. Glass is essentially a \"closed\" system."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2wttxb | why do american kids don't simply go to study in europe or asia instead of paying so much in us? | I just don't understand why would somebody put such crazy figures for education, especially when it seems to me that the general level of education in US is low except for the first 10 universities.
In Europe, Germany in example, you could easily study in one of the best universities, pay the tuition and live comfortably for 12-13k/year. Actually you could even make it for half of this if you cook yourself and get to student buildings.
Meanwhile americans often pay much more just for the tuition.
I don't get it.
**edit**: just to clarify, plenty of east Europeans/Asians and Africans study in Europe, I know also some South Americans that had their degrees here, but only one American girl (and she did not do that for economic reasons).
So all your answers (costs, documents, distance) seems pretty weak to me. If so many people from Egypt or Russia or China can live here and study here, why it is such a burden for North Americans? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wttxb/eli5_why_do_american_kids_dont_simply_go_to_study/ | {
"a_id": [
"cou1ndb",
"cou1zof"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Comfort zone has a lot to do with it. You're essentially asking a teenager to travel a half dozen time zones away, to a city where there is a vastly different culture (and in many places, a different language), and where they might not know anyone at all, and be much more cut off from the people they do know than if they were just an hour's flight away. Not an easy sell for many people.",
"1) It costs many thousands of dollars to move to another country.\n\n2) You have to qualify for a student visa to said country. The US is not a part of the Schengen Area or the EU. We therefore do not have free reign to travel Europe without proper passports and visas seeking to live, study, or work there. We do not even have free reign to travel without the proper documentation on vacation. To just up and go would make us illegal immigrants. \n\n3) We do not qualify for any of the tuition reduction practices held in the various countries as we are not citizens of those countries. So while tuition may be paid for or partially paid for by the government we would get the full rate. \n\n4) Language barrier. Most of us are monolingual with English being our language. That limits us to universities that teach in English. \n\n5) Familiarity and proximity to family. Going to a different culture to study is not a simple thing for the vast majority of people. Particularly at the age range that you are independent for the first time in your life. You are cut off from all friends and family with almost no chance of there being any type of support system for you emotionally, financially, or in any other manner when you up and go to another country. It is hard for there to be one when you go to another state (or with the larger states go to the other side of the state). \n\nEdit: Also what does \"cook yourself\" mean in this context? Are you talking about cooking your own meals or is this some type of slang?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1uaxzc | what's up with the "light" versions of beers in the usa. as a belgian i just cannot comprehend the idea of a "light" beer, please explain. | "Light" is only to be put in front of "coke" when talking about beverages. :p
I mean "Heineken Light"? Wtf people, Heineken is already one of the worst beers we know around here, and then to make it EVEN WORSE? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1uaxzc/eli5_whats_up_with_the_light_versions_of_beers_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"ceg84ms",
"ceg85vr",
"ceg86vv",
"cegbm4y"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
5,
12
],
"text": [
"It's beer for people who hate beer. Please don't get the impression that we all drink it here.",
"Some people don't really care for the taste of beer. To them, there is no difference in flavor between a high quality Belgian beer and a light beer. The only want the drink for the alcohol.\n\nSince they hate the flavor either way, they might as well drink an alcoholic beverage that is low on calories.\n\nSomeone who is used to Starbucks coffee might not understand why someone would drink cheap coffee, but if you are only drinking it for the caffeine and loathe the taste, you might as well drink the cheapest one available. Same principle applies here.",
"Lower calories. \n\nSimple as that. Tastes like piss, but it's socially acceptable and gets you drunk for fewer calories. Just like a \"diet\" soda.",
"Okay so people are saying only people who don't like real beer drink light beer, but that's not true.\n\nI love craft brews, pretty much the whole range except stouts and uber dark beers. But anything else I'm down.\n\nThere are two reasons why I drink light beer. \n\nA) Right now, I'm on a low carb diet. That means all beers except Michelob Ultra and Miller Lite are forsaken unto me. This is a tragedy but some beer is better than no beer.\n\nB) Light beers are not that bad. I guess if you only drink craft brews and are only drinking it for the intense flavors in those beers, light beer would have no point. But every now and then I'm in the mood for a lighter beer, that isn't quite so heavy. It's like saying why would you ever drink water? It's got no flavor compared to gatorade. Yeah that's true, but sometimes intense flavor isn't what I want. Sometimes having a gatorade would be too sugary and its just not what I'm in the mood for. I'm the same way with beers. Yeah I love a nice rich Trippel but sometimes I just want a Bud Light."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3maerm | the logic behind the debate over whether or not being teleported would teleport 'you' or just a copy of you? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3maerm/eli5_the_logic_behind_the_debate_over_whether_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvddx5q",
"cvdej7s",
"cvdeq0y",
"cvdi1x9"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Let's say you're me. 6'2, 180lbs, 12 inch penis. The whole 9 yards. I step into a teleporter and tell it I want to be transported from Los Angeles to New York.\n\nMy body breaks down. Every atom in my body is rearranged to teleport, and put back together on the other side. Am I dead? For a moment, there was no \"me\", I was simply a jumble of whatever flying through the air. What's coming out on the other side? How can that be \"me\", when I just died?",
"Because it works like this:\n\nThink 3d printing; Scan a plastic bottle, save pattern of bottle. Sent pattern to other place. Print bottle using that pattern at the other place. Smash the original bottle. \nThat's basically what happens.\n- Also it doesn't compare to sleeping AT ALL. Yes, when you sleep you lose conciousness, but you are still very much alive, just at reduced capacity. When you are teleported, for an time, you cease to exist until you are rebuild on the other side. Your brain doesn't cease to exist when you sleep. ",
"Think of it like Lego!\n\nTeleport You:\n\nYou start off as a Lego castle which is already made. You tear it down put it into a box and move the box to another room and build the castle again!\n\nTeleport a Copy:\n\nYou start off as a Lego castle, break it apart and put it into a box which you put away forever. You then go to another room and there's another Lego castle with the same pieces inside a box. You then make the same castle in the second room.\n\nIn the first example you know it's the same castle moved around cause you're using the same parts. \n\nThe second example is making another castle from the same parts as the first castle but, you opened a second box in another room. Both boxes contain the same parts, and work the same, so unless you know they're from two different boxes you'd think they were the exact same Lego castle.\n\nSo that begs the question, would it matter in the second example if you didn't know the second castle was copy since they're exactly the same in how they work, look and feel? Especially if you'll never see the first castle again. Now think about the same thing in terms of people.",
"Fundamental components. Protons, Neutrons and electrons. Well, top and down quarks if you want to get down the nitty gritty, but for the sake of simplicity we'll stick to the classics.\n\nYou're made up of a very specific combination of those three ingredients. P N E. \n\nIf you have a scanner that can detect the exact position and energy state of every fundamental particle in your body (which is as I understand it impossible due to the uncertainty principle) than you could use this information to recreate yourself in another location. \"Teleportation\" doesn't occur. You're scanning your body, breaking it apart, and reassembling it in another location.\n\nSounds reasonable. If you break your body but remake it identical to how it was, everything should be the same, right?\n\nBut what if you don't dematerialize the original body?\n\nWould you be consciously aware of both bodies? Think and process information through body minds at the same time? If so, that'd be trippy as hell wouldn't it? But more frighteningly .. if not... why not?\n\nYou're fundamental identical in every quantifiable way that we know of, and yet your consciousnesses would likely be unique to both the clone and the original. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5htrhr | how did fentanyl become an epidemic? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5htrhr/eli5_how_did_fentanyl_become_an_epidemic/ | {
"a_id": [
"db2yj6p",
"db2yuog"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"At least in the southeast US, there were large amounts of \"pill mills\" from Florida to at least Kentucky. Basically they were places where you could get oxycontin (and other opiates) very easily with little or fake proof of illness or a legitimate need for them. Within the past year or two, there has been a huge crackdown on these types of businesses, leading to a decreased supply of these drugs. Opiate addicts are not going to stop using because their pills run out, they will find other opiates to use. They turned to heroin and fentanyl simply because that is what was available. These are much easier to OD on compared to oxycontin (heroin is hard to dose, and with fentanyl the difference between the desired dose and a lethal dose is extremely small). This is a major player when you look at why fentanyl overdoses have skyrocketed recently.",
"Fentanyl is a synthetic opiate painkiller, like Oxycontin. It has been used for medical purposes for a long time. And just like Oxycontin, it has been used recreationally for as long as it has been around. However, people used to do things like steal from hospitals or doctor-shop to get a legit prescription that could then be sold on the street--it wasn't easily manufactured (outside of labs making pharmaceutical stuff, of course). Then someone figured out how to recreate pharmaceutical-grade fentanyl with the intent of distributing it on the street, and that's where we are right now. It's a simply matter of economics and ease of transport: fentanyl is incredibly, incredibly powerful. It can be shipped around the world under the radar and without detection, then cut into thousands of hits. Why deal in something like heroin when you could buy the same amount of fentanyl and multiply your sales by 50 or 100? And since it is so power, the difference between the high of your life and death comes down to how well calibrated the manufacturer's scale is or how much your hand shook when you prepared a hit."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1vd2wf | how do the murder laws on siamese twins work? | For example, if one twin murders someone, would both of them go to jail or would they go free. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vd2wf/eli5_how_do_the_murder_laws_on_siamese_twins_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cer12oz",
"cer149f"
],
"score": [
2,
9
],
"text": [
"Only one would be convicted.",
"The answer is no one knows. Conjoined twins, as is polite to call them, make up an extremely small minority of the population. No such thing has happened yet and it will have to be resolved in the courts. \n\nThat being said, for lesser crimes such as speeding, conjoined twins have been saved from jail time by claiming that incarcerating the innocent twin would be false imprisonment."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
399ey0 | how do chess grandmasters beat computer engines if the computer is able to calculate the best move possible in that situation based on an archive of all games that have been played? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/399ey0/eli5_how_do_chess_grandmasters_beat_computer/ | {
"a_id": [
"cs1i9ze",
"cs1jf7f",
"cs1kldn",
"cs1m6nl"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"The computer can easily calculate what is the best single move however chess is about thinking several moves ahead and that is where the computer runs into difficulties with the number of possible moves and counter moves. Grandmasters beat computers by applying something called [game theory](_URL_0_) predicting a likely move ahead where your opponent spots a perceived weakness, but instead it is a carefully laid trap. ",
"Keep in mind that [it is extremely difficult for a chess grandmaster to beat computer engines with the current level of technology. Even computer engines on mobile phones are now powerful enough to beat grandmasters now, so actual computers with dedicated hardware would be nigh impossible.](_URL_0_)\n\nHowever, one that that has emerged is [anti-computer tactics](_URL_1_), which is why so many grandmaster vs. computer games often end in draws rather than losses for the human. Basically, the human uses sub-optimal moves that draw out the game as long as possible. Computers have their strongest advantage in the early & mid game, because the possible legal moves are far more than humans can contemplate. In the late game, however, when there are few pieces, there are less total possible legal moves. If it's only a King and a few minor pieces on each side, there's only so much that needs to be evaluated relative to early/mid game, giving humans more even footing.\n\nSo while it used to be true that chess grandmasters could convincingly defeat computers, it is no longer the case as of circa 2003.",
" > if the computer is able to calculate the best move possible in that situation based on an archive of all games that have been played?\n\nIt isn't.",
"Chess engines don't generally work by using a database of all games of all time. At most they may use an opening database—which will rarely cover moves past the first 25.\n\nAnd it's not relevant anyway, because chess engines defeat any human today, even without an opening book. Basically, humans make oversights and relatively simple mistakes at chess, but computers do not. So the human will lose."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://youtu.be/1UimWEMnIBI"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_chess",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-computer_tactics"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
4a02a1 | what happens to your heart during drowning? | After u involuntarily breathe in water and everything and u become unconscious, do u still continue breathing in the water? and does your heart stop? ive tried googling it but nothing really answers these questions. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4a02a1/eli5_what_happens_to_your_heart_during_drowning/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0w9kus",
"d0w9t3s"
],
"score": [
21,
2
],
"text": [
"Step 1 is the [mammalian dive reflex](_URL_0_). Your heart slows and your body does some neat tricks to reduce your need for oxygen. This is healthy and a good thing, and happens whenever you're underwater regardless of whether or not you're drowning. As you're holding your breath, though, your heart rate will increase to try to circulate as much oxygen as there is available to you. As you run out of available oxygen, CO2 and lactic acid build up, triggering a reflex that forces your diaphragm to move, by-passing any other breath-control mechanism - it's not even a command to breathe, but a signal sent directly to the diaphragm. You're still underwater, so you inhale water.\n\nYou can still get a *tiny* bit of dissolved oxygen out of the water, but not much and not quickly. Between the lungs full of water and the lack of oxygen, you [panic](_URL_3_) * . Your heart rate skyrockets as adrenaline is dumped into your body. You will begin thrashing in a [poor] attempt to swim. Even accomplished swimmers will probably lose any coordination and probably would not be able to reach the surface. Often, drowning victims stop swimming entirely and simply stand up straight and reach upwards, trying to reach the surface. Eventually, you pass out as your body prioritizes oxygen use (your conscious brain, having only contributed to getting you into the situation, is turned off to conserve oxygen).\n\nYou stop thrashing and go motionless, again to conserve oxygen. The body basically gives up on helping itself at this point and goes into extreme conservation mode, hoping something else will get you out of the water. Your heart rate begins to slow down, just like in the mammalian dive reflex. Parts of your body are systematically cut off from the oxygen supply, with your heart being pretty much the last thing. You're completely out of even the last bit of reserve oxygen, and even the anaerobic reserves (the energy supplies that *don't* use oxygen at the cost of some really bad side-effects) are pretty much out. Your body can't use energy anymore, and toxic by-products (CO2, lactic acid, etc.) build up in your tissues. The only things left using energy are your heart and the part of your brain stem that controls your heart. Eventually, the brain stem succumbs to the toxic chemicals being produced and stops functioning. Your heartbeat is super slow, and unregulated. As the toxins build up in your heart, it becomes slower and more erratic until it's not actually moving any blood, it's just pathetically beating until the toxins build up so much that the heart dies.\n\nSo your heart does this: slow down - > speed up - > GO REALLY FAST (- > LUDICROUS SPEED? * ) - > slow down - > slooowwww down - > [tthhbb^bbb^bb^b^b^b^b](_URL_1_) - > stop\n\nEDIT: * At this point, you may (probably will) go into [shock](_URL_2_). [Fibrillation](_URL_4_) may happen at this point, which is rapid, irregular heartbeats that aren't coordinated enough to properly move your blood. This will speed up the suffocation process, as parts of your body start dying from lack of oxygen much sooner, since what little oxygen you have remaining and the toxic byproducts of anaerobic respiration aren't being efficiently spread or contained. Incidentally, that's what a [defibrillator](_URL_5_) is for: it shocks the heart to *stop* it from beating so it can restart with a normal rhythm, not unlike unplugging and replugging your modem when your internet isn't working. Defibrillators don't help much once your heart has actually stopped.",
"Your lungs are designed to push and pull air and have a really hard time once water is in them. Especially if you remain submerged, you likely won't be \"breathing in water.\" In your body's defense, the body's first response to water entering the airways is to close them up. This can prevent water from entering the lungs for a time, but in most people, it eventually relaxes and allows water in. Once water gets in the lungs, the chances of survival quickly diminish.\n\nYour heart may continue to pump for a little bit, but not long. Once water gets into the lungs, two things happen. First, the blood chemistry quickly changes due to osmosis. Second, no fresh oxygen enters the bloodstream. These quickly lead to cardiac arrest."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammalian_diving_reflex",
"http://www.indepthinfo.com/raspberries/images/raspberry-tongue.jpg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_%28circulatory%29",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fight-or-flight_response",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibrillation",
"https://images.rapgenius.com/c589704eb608236684ab8a178f7f9564.500x328x1.png"
],
[]
] |
|
1df5iy | how do planes flying on the same route avoid running into one another? | Presumably, there are dozens—if not hundreds—of flights per day on popular routes like JFK-Heathrow. How do these planes manage to avoid one another?
And what happens when two planes, flying in opposite directions on the same route, cross one another's path? Does one go under the other? Who decides? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1df5iy/eli5_how_do_planes_flying_on_the_same_route_avoid/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9pozol",
"c9ppmsl",
"c9pq9yz"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
13
],
"text": [
"They may not even follow the same _route_. Sure, the origin and destinations may overlap, but the [jet streams](_URL_1_) the flights utilize may bring them very far from each other.\n\nAnd if they do happen to be close to each other, the [air traffic controller](_URL_2_)'s job is to ensure that the planes do not get too close. Also, check out [airborne collision avoidance systems](_URL_0_), which alerts the pilot of other planes in its vicinity.",
"It is perhaps best to think of the air as like a multi-story parking garage. On each level there are rules about where you can go, parts that are one-way only, and parts where you need to keep right. But each level is totally independent of the others. Small aircraft don't go to the top floors, so it's only the big airplanes up there.\n\nThey all talk to air traffic controllers who put them on routes to imaginary points in the sky. When they get to that point, the get on the radio to a new air traffic controller who tells them which direction to turn and what altitude to maintain.",
"There are several layers to this answer, many of which have already been pointed out by others.\n\n- First of all, there are different types of **airspace**. In uncontrolled airspace, the pilots basically look out of the window to see and avoid each other. In many countries, there are facilities for air traffic control to help pilots spot other aircraft, by telling the pilots what they can see on radar. This is how most small aircraft avoid each other - but most airliners will rarely, if ever, fly in this type of airspace. Instead, they fly in controlled airspace.\n\n- Inside **controlled airspace**, there are some basic rules about following certain routes, and which level you have to fly at. The level will usually depend on which direction you're going, with eastbound traffic usually flying at an odd number of thousands of feet, and westbound traffic usually flying at an even number of thousands of feet. There are lots of exceptions to this, for example aircraft are more spaced out when they fly higher because their equipment is less accurate, and routes going north/south can't follow this basic rule.\n\n- The next layer is about **how the airspace is designed**. The routes that aircraft follow are carefully chosen to funnel aircraft in and out of the busiest bits in such a way as to allow the traffic to flow the easiest. For example, the airspace over England is very busy with traffic routing from London to the North Atlantic, and on towards America. To ensure a smooth flow of traffic on these routes (and considering that there are 5 international airports in London, dozens of routes across the Atlantic, and these same routes are also used by traffic going between Central Europe and North America), northbound traffic is generally restricted to the east of the country, east of Birmingham and then up to Manchester. Southbound traffic is generally restricted to the west of the country, from Liverpool and then south remaining west of Birmingham.\n\n- Despite all this planning, it's still necessary for **air traffic controllers** to keep a careful eye on what's happening. They use a combination of vertical separation and horizontal separation. For vertical separation, they keep you 1000' from anyone else going the same way. If you want to climb to 15,000', they'll approve that only when there's no one else along your route between your current level and 16,000', for example. Or, if necessary, they can use horizontal separation, so they'll allow you to climb to 15,000' only after instructing the other aircraft, the one at 14,000', to fly in a direction where he's not going to conflict with you (or equally they could tell you to fly in a specific direction).\n\n- The next layer is **arrivals**. Arrivals at busy airports follow very specific procedures, which often involve holding if there's traffic in front of you. When you have to hold, you enter the hold high up. The bottom aircraft in the hold comes out of the hold when he's able to start his approach, then, one by one, air traffic control tell everyone else to move down to the next level in the hold. The levels are 1000' apart, so they are using vertical separation to protect the aircraft in the hold from each other.\n\n- **Departure routes** are then planned so that they go between the arrival routes. Departures are normally held to a low level initially, with permission given to climb higher only once air traffic control can see there's no one else at a higher level in your way.\n\n- Then there's the final layer - **TCAS, Traffic Collision Avoidance System**. This is a fail-safe mechanism fitted to every airliner. It looks for other aircraft, and if it spots a potential collision it will warn the pilots. If the collision starts to become a real possibility, TCAS will instruct the pilot to take evasive action - climbing, descending, or maintaining the current level - after having automatically agreed the action with the TCAS system on the other aircraft if possible. Pilots are taught that TCAS Resolution Advisories - the instructions to avoid collisions - take precedence over everything else, even if they contradict instructions coming from somewhere else like air traffic control.\n\nTL;DR - there are many, many systems in place to protect aircraft, from generic rules, to specific planning of busy bits of airspace, to humans watching the whole thing, and including automatic systems just in case all the other systems don't work for any reason."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_collision_avoidance_systems",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_stream",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_traffic_controller"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
3e3f19 | how do air bubbles in a needle kill you if you don't get them all out before injecting? | I've heard any air bubbles left inside (and injected into your body) can kill you. This is why you always see people test the needle before using it. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3e3f19/eli5_how_do_air_bubbles_in_a_needle_kill_you_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctb3q4b"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"I think that's mostly a Hollywood invention. A large amount of air injected into a vein can kill you, but a little bit won't. Imagine my surprise when I was in the hospital and saw a few air bubbles go into my vein. I freaked out and thought I was going to die, but absolutely nothing happened. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
926bri | once an addict always an addict. how/why is this so? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/926bri/eli5_once_an_addict_always_an_addict_howwhy_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"e33deuw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Keeps us honest, keeps us clean. Our brains arealways gonna be wired that way because the drugs changed the neurological pathways and chemical interactions we experience, so if we accept that, it's gonna be easier to avoid relapse."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5wqrze | how bad it is for me to not thoroughly chew my food? | I basically chew just enough to lubricate and swallow. All I know is that Ive been doing this my whole life and always have really stinky farts. Not sure if the two are related. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5wqrze/eli5_how_bad_it_is_for_me_to_not_thoroughly_chew/ | {
"a_id": [
"decf11s"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"It isn't bad and not even remotely related. Chewing helps the digestive system process food more efficiently but you probably won't notice it even if you don't chew at all (just don't do that too often).\n\nStinky farts have more to do with the food you eat, and the bacteria in your intestines. Those bacteria help you with digesting the food, but produce waste products and gases at the same time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1jcuwu | destruction of the second temple? | How did the destruction of the Second Temple influence Jewish religious life? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1jcuwu/eli5_destruction_of_the_second_temple/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbdg00r",
"cbdimav"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Ritual animal sacrifice ended since it required the Temple. This was, more or less, replaced by a series of prayers called the \"Amidah\" which extoll numerous virtues and traits of G-d. \n\nThe importance of the Levites and Cohanim (priestly tribe and high priests) diminished since the temple was gone. \n\nThe pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton has become lost with nowhere to speak it. \n\nT'sha b'av or the Ninth of Av is a \"holiday\" mourning the loss of the first and second temples",
"maybe bring this question to /r/judaism !"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
dcplr0 | why do state governments pay hospitals? | I read this article in the NYTimes, and I don’t understand why hospitals are paid by states in the first place. Doesn’t Medicare pay individuals directly who then pay the hospital? Why the government middleman?
_URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dcplr0/eli5_why_do_state_governments_pay_hospitals/ | {
"a_id": [
"f29rukm",
"f2a2hrd"
],
"score": [
18,
11
],
"text": [
"Reimbursement to hospitals from Medicaid comes directly from the government to the hospitals.",
" > Doesn’t Medicare pay individuals directly who then pay the hospital? Why the government middleman?\n\nNo, that is not how insurance works for anyone. Insurance is paid directly to the billing entity. Imagine the quantity of fraud and misappropriation if Medicare or Aetna was sending around checks to people for $50k and telling them \"make sure you pay the hospital with this money\"."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/03/nyregion/medicaid-donation-hospitals-cuomo.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.