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
list | selftext_urls
list | answers_urls
list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1l3zsv | what exactly does it mean to be socially liberal but economically conservative? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1l3zsv/eli5_what_exactly_does_it_mean_to_be_socially/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbvjnru",
"cbvjo58",
"cbvmcxz"
],
"score": [
2,
18,
2
],
"text": [
"It's to hold liberal positions on social value issues (abortion, gay rights etc.) while holding conservative positions on economic questions (against government intervention in the marketplace, against taxation, for balanced public budgets, against Keynesian policies = the state moderating the effects of boom-and-bust business cycles by stimulating demand (with debt funding) during the bust).",
"Both positions are characterised by a belief that the government should stay out of way of the people. Socially this can mean that the government souldn't be telling people what drugs they are allowed to put into their bodies, or what kind of person they're allowed to marry, while economically it may involve the belief that the government souldn't tax or regulate businesses as much as it does.",
"It means you like gays, but you won't buy them a drink. \n\n...in seriousness, it means you have liberal-like political and social values; financially, you are conservative, and you do not spend freely (not a \"cheapo\", but more so, fiscally shrewd)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
13cqsl | the concepts of ontology/ontological primitives, terminological relations, analysis, empiricism and skepticism. | This is really a post on the behalf of several confused computer scientists.
We have a class intended to help us with writing our dissertations. One of our assignments is to write about our dissertations focused around the ideas in title, and several articles we've read such as; Quine's Two Dogmas of Empiricism, Descartes' Discourse on a method, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
The main problem is we're still not really understanding the concepts, anything we read online confuses us more.
So if anyone could explain them to us like we're five that would be fantastic. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13cqsl/eli5_the_concepts_of_ontologyontological/ | {
"a_id": [
"c72u77h",
"c7365g2"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"Never done an ELI5, so my apologies if it's a disaster.\n\nYou see a cat or you imagine a unicorn.\n\n* Do either of those things exist as is - i.e. as you see it or imagine it - or do they reflect some hidden reality that you cannot see or imagine? Ontology provides the means for asking useful questions about that problem. Plato, for example, said that the cat and the unicorn are 'shadows' of some higher 'form'.\n\n* An ontological primitive says that even though a real cat and imaginary unicorn are different, they can be 'reduced' to a common factor, entity, property, or principal. \n\n* Analysis says that both the cat and the unicorn exist, and that you can empirically test the cat.\n\n* Guys like Quine and Popper say that when you get right down to it, you cannot define any quality between a cat and a unicorn that is different (i.e.' the problem of demarcation'), even though you can pet the cat while the unicorn 'disappears' as soon as you stop thinking about it.\n\n* Reductionism is an empirical method that takes an object and finds its constituent parts. For example, humans - > organs - > cells - > molecules - > atoms - > particles - > strings. The long-standing interpretation is that an object can be explained by its parts. Analysis depends on its general application. We can begin to characterize a cat by describing what its made of.\n\n* Emergence (emergentism) recognizes the importance and success of reductionism, but says that characterizing the state of all strings, particles, atoms, etc. will NOT tell you if the cat is going to barf on your lap tomorrow, or if the unicorn will start singing Rhianna songs in ten seconds.\n\n* Descartes realized that if you shave a cat, it remains a cat even though it looks completely different. He started asking why - what makes a cat a cat? - and came to realize the only thing he could say for sure was that he himself existed since he was doubting himself ('I think therefore I am'). This was the start/revival of the western skeptical tradition.\n\nCouple points on logic:\n\n* Deduction is going from the general to the specific (i.e. all cats are mortal, Garfield is a cat, therefore, Garfield is mortal). It can be applied in a pure, abstract ontological sense (Descartes' proof of God), or in an empirical sense (i.e. a scientific study).\n\n* Induction is the reverse process going from the specific to the general. Garfield hates Mondays (true), Garfield is a cat (true), therefore, all cats hate Mondays (false). Despite two true premises, a false conclusion is reached. Many philosophers believe induction is 'broken', or a bad source of knowledge.\n\n* Empricism, reductionism, and deduction - and to a degree ontology - are like peas in a pod. Very successful. On the other hand, emergence appears to be valid by virtue of induction being 'broken'. \n\n\n\n\n\n",
"Empiricism is the idea that knowledge is derived from experience, not anything else. It is in contrast to rationalism, which is the idea that knowledge can be derived from reason and logic without experience. Many early Greek thinkers advocated rationalism — they would just *think* about the big questions, rather than actually trying to solve the answers in the real world. The modern scientific method uses empiricism though — scientists don't sit and think about questions they would like to answer; they go out and do experiments and experience the answer for themselves, and only draw conclusions based on what they can actually detect in some way.\n\nSkepticism comes in two main varieties — philosophical skepticism, and so called rational skepticism or scientific skepticism. Philosophical skepticism is the position of doubting *everything*, even the existence of the external world, or the self. Scientific skepticism is being doubtful of claims about the world that don't have empirical evidence. Scientific skepticism is generally considered one of the most important intellectual tools a person can have — it's pretty much the opposite of being a gullible fool. Philosophical skepticism doesn't generally bring a lot to the table — doubting the existence of everything makes any discussion almost pointless."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4g32ns | if the population is predicted to stabilise at 9 billion, how will an economy based on growth sustain itself? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4g32ns/eli5_if_the_population_is_predicted_to_stabilise/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2e5vfe",
"d2e66g4",
"d2e77ds",
"d2e8317"
],
"score": [
33,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"An economy can be based on productivity growth regardless of population growth. This happens through capital investment or education or technological advances.",
"People will always want more and better things and conditions in their lives. Therefore, despite a stable population the economy shall always have the need and scope for growth.\n\nAs long as resources still need to be used in a sustainable manner (future shifts to more renewable sources of energy, efficient natural resource management, tapping unused human resource), human consumption still to be made more efficient, the economy would be able to grow in a sustainable manner.",
"Okay looks like no one has studied economics here. Let me tell you, growth in population does not support economic development/growth. In macroeconomic theory(Solow Model) population growth has a negative impact on growth because as population grows, capital per person goes down. And output/person = y/l = f(k/l).",
"Is it really predicted to stabilise at 9 billion? And why that number as oppose to any othe number?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2to0ge | dear "pro" redditors, how can i (newbie redditor) have the best possible reddit experience i can get? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2to0ge/eli5_dear_pro_redditors_how_can_i_newbie_redditor/ | {
"a_id": [
"co0pxcw",
"co0qapr"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Be yourself. Read the sidebar. Learn your history. Upvote or downvote appropriately. Don't repost. Use the search feature. Don't piss off the hive mind. Remember there is a human on the other side of the conversation. Explore smaller subs. Oh, and have fun. \n\nP.S. Fuck Jenny.\n\nEdit: Could someone please post a link to the History of Filth for me? ",
"Seriously, read the sidebar when you want to post in a new subreddit. Just do it, you'll save everyone's time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
21rzvm | i live in the united states. what happens if i don't have health insurance by the "cut off day" tomorrow? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21rzvm/eli5_i_live_in_the_united_states_what_happens_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgfxtm6",
"cgg0ieo",
"cgg142r",
"cgg29wa",
"cgg2tqa",
"cgg42ai",
"cgg4439",
"cgg5vqg",
"cgg69z7",
"cgg6lvu",
"cgg6ndk",
"cgg6rv1",
"cgg8iud",
"cgg8ra0",
"cgg9606",
"cgg98ul",
"cgg9k1c",
"cgg9rvw",
"cgg9zv4",
"cgga63k",
"cgga7p8",
"cgga8ls",
"cggabxg",
"cggaw1x",
"cggazkc",
"cggb397",
"cggb636",
"cggbgj9",
"cggbn3v",
"cggbq8y",
"cggbyvn",
"cggcm1p",
"cggcmbv",
"cggcyv3",
"cggd112",
"cggd15g",
"cggd92q",
"cggdbrm",
"cggdg4j",
"cggdgf5",
"cggdjko",
"cggdlio",
"cggdnwf",
"cggdrou",
"cggdvad",
"cggdxww",
"cggdzq4",
"cgge0ez",
"cgge217",
"cgge65n",
"cggeoe3",
"cggeqoe",
"cggf3xr",
"cggf50x",
"cggf8wy",
"cggfmlt",
"cgggkim",
"cgggqll",
"cggi6qm",
"cggmsml",
"cggo4rk"
],
"score": [
630,
40,
66,
6,
26,
5,
36,
14,
4,
110,
2,
21,
9,
3,
2,
18,
3,
4,
11,
2,
2,
5,
23,
2,
3,
30,
20,
37,
4,
5,
10,
4,
2,
2,
2,
14,
3,
2,
4,
2,
5,
3,
3,
3,
18,
2,
5,
5,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
4,
2,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"You'll have to pay a penalty of either $95, or 1% of your annual income, whichever is greater. The penalty will increase each year. In 2015 it’s 2% of income or $325. In 2016 and later it’s 2.5% of income or $695, with adjustments for inflation.\n\n**Edit:** For all the people who are asking me about specific circumstances simply because I have the top comment: I'm just a guy who knows how to google things. If you have legitimate questions about something as serious as your own, personal insurance choices, don't ask me; ask one of the [healthcare navigators](_URL_0_) whose job is to help people understand all their options (for free).",
"What about for those of us who are under 26 and uninsured? Is our parents' insurance supposed to cover us or are we on our own?",
"Because this is a popular and very pertinent topic, we have designated it a featured thread! Unlike Official Threads, not all Affordable Care Act (Obamacare)-related questions need to be posted in this thread, but we still want to distinguish it because it's a quality topic that we feel people should see.",
"Similar question:\n\nI'm a college student graduating in April. I believe my university's health coverage expires upon my graduation. Am I in trouble?",
"My girlfriend who makes less than 20,000 a year got obamacare and had to pay 150 a month. Thanks Obama.",
"Do I have to do anything if I'm insured through work? Do I have to do anything on the website at all?",
"Soo what is going on?\n\nI am totally out of the loop. 27 American contract worker, no insurance and PT student. So I need what now? I need to sign up for health insurance, or else I pay a fine? I don't think I've been to the doctor for 10 or so years. I've probably made under 15K in the past year, pretty much living off of savings until the seasonal contracts start up again.\n\nJesus, I feel like I've been living under a rock.",
"If you aren't able to sign up due to technical problems, don't stress. You will not get penalized if you miss the deadline, so long as this is your reason. The government wants you to sign up ASAP, but they won't punish you for being a few days late.\n\n[Source: Washington Week](_URL_0_)",
"Is it possible for us to decide as a people to just say \"fuck this\" and completely disregard that they're trying to do things? I mean we have more power anyways. If enough people just decide they don't care about a policy because it could be implemented better, I don't think there's much they could do.",
"Can anyone explain the fucking logic behind this?\n\nWe're broke as it is, who the fuck thinks we have the extra money for another bill/fine? It's very unnecesary to FINE people over not being able to afford health insurance.",
"What about if your employment that provides insurance ends?\n\nIm a freelancer and currently I work at a job that provides insurance. But in a month or two the project will deliver and I'll be let go.\n\nWhat does \"not have insurance\" really mean in the eyes of the govt? If I have insurance 7 months out of the year am I clear of the fine? What is the criteria of judging someones coverage?\n\nAnd since Im insured now, but wont be soon, I wont have a chance at the exchange and will have to get more expensive insurance directly from a provider?",
"I still think the $95 penalty shouldn't be legal. \n",
"I'm unemployed, living with my girlfriend. Been unemployed for a long time, and the job market is terrible. My state declined to expand their medicaid, so I'm pretty sure my application will be denied. This is really, really frustrating.",
"What if I'm going to be eligible for insurance through my work in a few weeks? Should i still get a months worth of insurance to cover till then? ",
"Okay can someone PLEASE help me? I made an account just to ask!: I'm 18 years old, I graduated from High School last June. I am unemployed and have never had a job. I have NEVER had healthcare or any health insurance whatsoever because I came from a very poor family. What the hell do I do? What does this mean to me? Someone please help? ",
"Good explanation on how Republican states turning down free money from federal medicaid expansion on ideological grounds will leave millions without insurance.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Paying $700 this year in additional taxes, for nothing. ",
"You are required by law to have health insurance in the us? Holy fuck. What about people on fixed incomes? Even $95 a year could be the difference between eating and going hungry. ",
"To be honest, not much. First you have to ask yourself a few questions:\n\n* Are you covered under your parents' insurance? \n* Are you under the age of 26 if so?\n* If not, are you privately insured through your employer?\n* Have you bought a private plan by yourself?\n\nIf you don't have insurance through any of these options, /u/AnteChronos pretty much summed it up. \n\nBut, taking another view, if you are healthy, can see into the future (and know you won't get injured or sick), then it may be much cheaper for you to simply pay the fine... for now.\n\nBut anyone who has the funds should definitely consider at least signing up for a silver plan. People who forgo medical treatment because of the associated costs due to lack of insurance are actually a big reason that healthcare costs are so high.\n\nWhy, you ask? Because the costs to treat someone who comes into the ER after neglecting their minor ailments who now has a full-blown emergency have to be diffused somehow, even if they can't pay for it. Bummer.",
"Props to WunPump. Most people wouldn't try to understand this. You asked a great question, this a good way to be involved no matter what side of politics you live on.",
"So what are my options?\nI'm a type 1 Diabetic so I need insurance.\n27, Non-Smoker, No Income, and I'm in NC ",
"It seems insane to me that there is no universal healthcare. You would think it would be a national priority. It never fails to astound me. ",
"I've only tried to apply 5 times now and every single time they've been \"unable to verify my identity.\" Oddly enough, they had no problems processing my tax return or my FAFSA. So, I'll probably have to do a year without insurance and pay their $95 fine, not that I could afford insurance even if my identity was verified correctly.",
"Do you have to be a citizen to do this? Resident?",
"What if you're waiting for forever for Cover California to accept your documents? \nI've signed up months ago, but my application isn't complete because they won't process my uploaded passport, drivers license as proof of residency.",
"To be noted: if you start your application by the cut off date (March 31) you have until the 15th of April to complete your app. So if you need to research more, just complete the first part of the application and go back",
"Windows XP and Obamacare in nearly the same fucking week. Really sucks for those procrastinating, living-under-a-rock types. ",
"excuse me, but what the hell is the point of having health insurance if the deductible is like 6000?\n\nI live in germany and have a private health insurance plan - > I pay 120 Euro's /month and have a 600 Euro deductible.\n\nTHe 'cheapest' plan i could get in the US where i used to live is 150 Dollars monthly with a 6000 deductible? \n\nYOu crazy, bro's?",
"Drone strikes from what I understand",
"As usual the media has done a bang up job of helping the public understand. ",
"What if you dont have a job or income?",
"You'll get punished for not being able to afford it.",
"Great. Now my family literally can't afford to live.",
"Nothing really. They're gonna keep (illegally) pushing the date forward without congressional approval. ",
"The real question is why didn't we just expand medicare to cover everyone. The system is already in place. The ACA is a clusterfuck because of the insurers, the pharmaceutical industry, and HMO's that are controlled by the top 3% that control our economy and social programs.\n ",
"Not a damn thing. If you get a tax refund next year they'll take out the fine. Just make sure you don't get a refund. Fuck them.",
"I think the United States did this whole healthcare thing backwards. Instead of reducing the cost of healthcare so people can actually afford it, we are now forcing insurance coverage to make sure those costs stay high. It's sort of like the housing market; if everybody's got money, the price of houses go up. ",
"Would this cut of date affect minors at all? Assuming you don't count what the parents do before the cut off I mean.",
"Stop with these rants of \"is this really freedom?\" What obamacare really wants to achieve is a long term thing. If we all got health insurance today we would see a huge price drop in health insurance because we are all putting money into the pot and the more money insurance companies get the less we will have to pay in the long run. You kids need to understand something before you go on complaining about it. I know a lot of people cant afford it today but thats the reason its being done this way. Something like health insurance prices can't be fixed over night.\n\nPS: I can't afford it either",
"So I pay a fine to the gov ever year and don't buy insurance like the last 10 years of my life. I get sick go to doctors. Because so many people don't pay the doctor they charge ridiculous rates. I was charged $80 for one 400mg Ibuprofen the last time I need medical treatment. Ok so they charge me a ton because people cant pay and because of that I can't pay. When I see $80 for one Ibuprofen I don't even consider paying. Now all you fools who buy insurance have to pay for me to not have it and can never afford it. You could argue that I still owe a ton of money and that will hurt my credit but the fuck wants credit? So I can do what get more bills? Nope I just wait till the bills pile up and when they actually start doing something about getting the money I owe that's when I go bankrupt and start over. What a great system...\nI do pay bills that are reasonable. When I have a cold the clinic will see me for $150 bucks. That I can handle. That seems fair and deserves payment. When I got in a car accident and auto Insurance refuses to pay hospital bill of 8 grand for literally 4 stitches in my lip I stop giving a fuck. ",
"Another question -\n\nWhat happens if you have been trying to get enrolled in an insurance plan since November 2013 and due to various issues beyond your control(errors, red tape and miscommunication between _URL_0_, the insurance company and your State's Dept of Health and Human Services) you are now waiting for your case to be resolved and will likely miss the deadline to be enrolled?\n\nEdit - Oh, I forgot to mention the part where I paid the premium for coverage to start in April... but as of today I still don't have an actual insurance policy... And it's looking like we will paying for medical bills out of pocket until this gets resolved.",
"Will the monthly premiums go down each subsequent year? The cheapest plan for me is $183/month and doesn't even have dental/vision. ",
"Hmm... I can pay one payment of $95 or pay probably at least that once a month? Seems like the smarter decision to just pay the penalty and move on. ",
"I've been unemployed since mid-January and am about to relocate and start a new job in roughly a month. After reading through the comments it looks like I'll have to eat the cost of the penalty even after I eventually get insurance through my employer.\n\nAlso, I watched my SO signing up and the deductibles and monthly costs are mind-blowing considering what she makes, especially since she gets most of her income from tips. 250-300 per month and 5-6k deductibles, and vision and dental aren't even covered? So frustrating.",
"So, what happens if I don't get insurance? I pay a fine.\n\nSo what happens if I don't pay that fine? I go to jail.\n\nJail has free doctors. This is stupid. Why don't we just cut back on military/police/government spending and actually have a free health care.",
"I live in Europe, and my son is in the States. He is attending university but is not working. Will the cut off date apply to someone not working? I support him 100% financially. I don't want him to get hit with a huge bill when he finally does begin working. ",
"You'll just get fined by the government for refusing to pay for old people's medical treatment. No big whoop.",
"What I see here are a lot of ignorant people unwilling to inform themselves through the official channels, but more than willing to complain about their President, Congress, governor, state legislature, etc. Grow up! Yes, this law is complicated. Yes, it affects a lot of people. Today is the deadline (which should have been three months ago), and you're looking for information today on Reddit? Have some introspection and take responsibility for your actions, and maybe if you learned something on your own, you'd do a better job voting.",
"this is kind of dark that they are forcing you to buy something. i didn't know about a punishment for not signing up",
"My wife has health insurance right now (from her parents) but she turns 26 in three weeks. What will happen then?",
"Signed up... can't login... resets don't work... sites not working properly. =(",
"So, a lot of people are just making jokes. So I guess I'll actually answer the question. It's a penalty of $93 (Or very close to it... I forget the exact amount) or 1% of your annual income (whichever is greater). This penalty will be levied when you file your Tax Return for this year. No, you will not go to jail if you don't buy insurance... but failing to pay the penalty will be regarded as Tax Fraud akin to failing to pay any other form of taxation you owe. \n\nIn essence, this entire thing is just a round-a-bout and overly complicated way for the government to simply levy a Health Care Tax and ensure that most people (everyone ideally) has health coverage. It had to be done this way to gratify insurance companies and because Single Payer is obviously communism that would destroy American freedom... /end sarcasam",
"what if you have insurance through veterans disability, the VA, do you still have to pay?",
"So it's actually a lot cheaper for young people who are healthy to just pay the fine and visit the E.R. incase of emergency.\n\nACA is fail. If the penalty for not enrolling is lower than the cost of enrolling no one is going to enroll based off the penalty. Then all that's left is arguments on what \"may happen\" if you don't, and those have never been effective.",
"Technically I did sign up before the deadline but I don't have any money to pay for it. Not sure if I will get fined. The fine is sort of adding insult to injury - no pun.",
"got mine done in December. had first doctor visit friday. got lab work done today and x-rays of my uber flat feet for my physical next week. first in over ten years. _URL_0_",
"So....I have over 150k worth of student loan debt....I seriously clear out my entire bank account every month to these assholes. The cheapest insurance plan I can get through obamacare is $200 / month....I CANNOT afford this every month. I guess there goes my tax return next year. I want to break the fuck down and cry....I don't know what to do. ",
"To answer the original question:\n\n* Go to _URL_0_, create an account and answer the questions.\n\n* If you are single and make less than $12,000 a year, you be able to get Medicaid. Have them forward the application to your state's Medicaid office. Cost to you $0\n\n* If you make too much for Medicaid, you may be able to get extended-Medicaid, provided your state pass the extension law.\n\n* If your state didn't extend Medicaid, you will get a penalty exemption, print it out and use it to avoid tax penalty on your taxes, next year.\n\n* If you make too much for the extended Medicaid exemption, look over the plans. You may or may not get the health care subsidy, the cut off is around $35,000 for a single person. Chat with an agent if your questions aren't answered with the FAQ.\n\n* Pick a plan, find one you can live with. Deductibles range from $5,000 to $500 (annual out-of-pocket cost for medical services). \n\nThe only way to know how this affects you is to go to _URL_0_ and find out. Don't take my word for it. ",
"See this is the problem with the \"law\".. All it does it MAKE people buy health insurance. Even if you make 25k a year the cheapest plan and it is coverage is still a total rip off. It solves nothing.",
"For those responding to posts about qualifying for Medicaid if you cannot afford obamacare. That is kinda the issue.....there is no Medicaid expansion for the poor in nearly half the states, and in the poorest states with the highest numbers of uninsured. So, the advice \"just get Medicaid\" doesn't apply to most uninsured people who are poor. ",
"What a stupid fucking system....\n\nYour country is doomed if it can't even figure out a basic service like healthcare...so pathetic."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://localhelp.healthcare.gov/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2013/11/biggest-obamacare-losers-cities-states-wont-expand-medicaid/7537/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"Healthcare.gov"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/vNISifT"
],
[],
[
"healthcare.gov"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5gpveq | the problem with social securitya and why im told i will have to work till i'm 75? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5gpveq/eli5_the_problem_with_social_securitya_and_why_im/ | {
"a_id": [
"dau58j8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"SocSec works just fine and you should be able to retire at 62.... until Congress decided to borrow from it. But they will pay back what they took right? Wrong, they take our money and then they tell us that SocSec is in trouble and we have to work longer all because they don't want to ever pay back what they took. \n\nCongress = Thieves!\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
436ufp | regarding the recent discoveries about joyce and woolf, how can novels have 'fractal structures'? what does this even mean? | Recently numerous articles have emerged claiming that many classic novels have a 'fractal' structure, and this may contribute as to why they are so beloved.
- _URL_1_
- _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/436ufp/eli5_regarding_the_recent_discoveries_about_joyce/ | {
"a_id": [
"czfzwsj",
"czi15wi"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In math \"fractal\" means that the image is self referencing. They have some use in structures, but [this HTML5 video demostrates what a fractal is in a more pure mathematical sense](_URL_1_)\n\nI'm only skimming the article, but it seems like they're saying the chapters in a novel follow a similar plot structure as the book itself, and that the scenes inside of the chapters follow that same basic plot structure. So, if you remember from high school lit the 'classical story structure' of \"introduction, rising tension, resolution, falling tension, conclusion\", that means that the chapters in a book following that story structure would itself have an introduction, rising tension, resolution, falling tension, and conclusion. \n\nIt's interesting that they did this, but it's not actually *new* in the world of story telling to say \"your chapters and scenes should have a distinct story structure\". [This is a video from 2012 that nicely ELI5's the concept using Star Wars](_URL_0_). ",
"\"To determine whether the books had fractal structures, the academics looked at the variation of sentence lengths, finding that each sentence, or fragment, had a structure that resembled the whole of the book.\"\n\nSo it seems to be much more at the sentence level than in terms of plot. It's much easier, or rather, it's much easier to do intentionally at the level of plot because plot is in bigger \"chunks\" and so it's easier to organize into a self-referential structure.\n\nAnyway, I think what this means essentially is that when you analyze the variations in sentence length, throughout the book, you see that the pattern at a micro-level, is the same as when you zoom out and look at the book as a whole. So you know how a fractal is self-same all the way down? (Cauliflower, which has a fractal structure, always looks like cauliflower, no matter at what level of magnification you look at it.) These researchers are saying that Finnegans Wake is the same all the way down, so to speak.\n\nThis is not the first study to take this tact re: Finnegans Wake. This book is from 1997: _URL_0_\n\nIt draws some of the same conclusions, but it's written by literary scholars, not scientists, and so it's much more theoretical/interpretive, if you catch my meaning.\n\nThere's lots of this type of weird mathematical game-play in 20th century literature. Though almost certainly Joyce didn't intend this fractal quality, there are writers, particularly in the French Oulipo movement, who played lots of games with the structures of their novels, embedded bizarre organizational patterns in them. This is straight from the Wikipedia page:\n\n\"Oulipo (French pronunciation: [ulipo], short for French: Ouvroir de littérature potentielle; roughly translated: \"workshop of potential literature\") is a loose gathering of (mainly) French-speaking writers and mathematicians who seek to create works using constrained writing techniques. It was founded in 1960 by Raymond Queneau and François Le Lionnais. Other notable members have included novelists Georges Perec and Italo Calvino, poets Oskar Pastior, Jean Lescure and poet/mathematician Jacques Roubaud.\n\nThe group defines the term littérature potentielle as (rough translation): \"the seeking of new structures and patterns which may be used by writers in any way they enjoy.\"\n\nConstraints are used as a means of triggering ideas and inspiration, most notably Perec's \"story-making machine\", which he used in the construction of Life A User's Manual. As well as established techniques, such as lipograms (Perec's novel A Void) and palindromes, the group devises new methods, often based on mathematical problems, such as the knight's tour of the chess-board and permutations.\"\n\nI think the Oulipo movement is really what even made these kinds of investigations into the patterns and structures of literature a legitimate way to look at a novel or a poem. They showed people that if you could engineer weird experiments inside a novel, you could probably reverse engineer them in other novels, or could at least see if some of the same things are going on (albeit coincidentally) in them, which is I think what this Joyce experiment is sort of doing. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://phys.org/news/2016-01-world-greatest-literature-reveals-multifractals.html",
"http://electricliterature.com/classic-novels-by-james-joyce-and-virginia-woolf-contain-mathematical-mulitfractal-structures/"
] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LScL4CWe5E",
"http://giphy.com/gifs/math-fractal-mathematics-JReakhhPF0eEE"
],
[
"http://www.press.uillinois.edu/books/catalog/76mhw3hn9780252022791.html"
]
] |
|
1rs8a0 | if mouthwash kills germs, then why don't we spit it back into the bottle? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rs8a0/if_mouthwash_kills_germs_then_why_dont_we_spit_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdqse88",
"cdqbnqd",
"cdqbqxt",
"cdqdipi",
"cdqf9mn"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
3,
8,
6
],
"text": [
"who says you can't? As long as you do it to your own bottle, it's ok. Just don't do it to someone else's bottle.",
"Because germs aren't the only thing in your mouth? Most people are sorta against ingesting old food particles and plaque. ",
"Because germs are not the only things in your mouth, there are also bits of food, and plaque, and if youspit mouthwash back in to the bottle it'll get gross fast. Plus a small amount of the mouthwash stays in your mouth, so you'd gradually have less mouthwash.",
"If you only use a towel to dry yourself off after your clean why ever wash it... ",
"If you did this you would be adding your spit to the bottle every time and so the mouth wash would become dilute and ineffective. Also it would be gross. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
12sxlz | the projected "fiscal cliff" that is to come before year's end. | Edit: So, based on everyone's comments, I see why and how this could be disastrous for our economy, but what about interest rates? Not just at my local bank but at central banks and trading among countries. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/12sxlz/eli5_the_projected_fiscal_cliff_that_is_to_come/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6xwmgm",
"c6xx64u",
"c6yjp6k"
],
"score": [
4,
20,
82
],
"text": [
"Republicans put up a fight the last time the national debt limit had to be raised. It got down to the wire. The agreement said that taxes would go up and spending would go down (mostly hitting the military). With this agreement, the national debt limit was raised.\n\nIf this agreement goes into effect as planned, it's suggested the proposed tax increases and spending cuts would slow the economy greatly, perhaps pushing it into another recession. But, Democrats don't want to cut spending outside of the military, and Republicans don't want to raise taxes. And nobody wants to touch the big spending items, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. \n",
"The fiscal cliff is a term that essentially describes the automatic federal spending cuts, expiring tax breaks and tax increases that are set to come into effect this coming January. This would cut the federal budget by 607 billion according to the Congressional Budget Office's data release. This can all change, however, if Congress either makes changes or extends the deadlines. \n\nThe taxes, benefits, and other such measures included in this fiscal cliff include: \n\n1. Bush tax cuts- capital gains rate goes up to 20%. Dividends would also be taxed as ordinary income, not at 15%. \n2. Social Security tax- Currently at 4.2%, would go to 6.2%. \n3. Alternative Minimum Tax- right now applies to ~4.5 million people, would change to apply to ~33 people. \n4. Medicare- a new Medicare tax on investment income at 3.8% would take effect. \n5. Many other reimbursements, benefits, and tax provisions would also either come into effect or go away. \n\nThis drastic change in taxation and benefits would most likely create a short term set back to the economy, therefore hurting other economies across the globe that depend on the US demand for their products and/or services. \n\nThat's about all I got on this. Hope it helps. ",
"\nThe Markets are collapsing partially as a result of Obama's election and partially as a result of the \"fiscal cliff.\" What exactly is that? The market's worrying basically breaks down into 3 different points of concern.\n\nA) The European Economy - Because of the large amount of trade we do with Europe, large-scale economic developments there will inevitably affect the United State's economy. Right now, the EU and many member nations have put deep cuts in spending in place to control their budget shortfalls. This has led to slow growth, a weakened European economy, and bailouts from the more prosperous nations (Germany, the Nordic States) to the less-so (Greece, Ireland, Spain). If one of those economies either defaults (thus forcing a large drop in the Euro's value) or leaves the European Union (same effect), then the negative effects will trickle over to the U.S. This is the first concern.\n\nB) Obama Regulations - Even though many liberal-leaning websites do not buy into this, part of the reaction of the markets is to Obama's re-election and the inevitable regulation overhaul that comes with it. Part of the market is reacting to uncertainty surrounding how much he'll actually be able to (or even want to) enact. Obama's stated plan calls for a reduction in the overall tax rate for corporations to 20% coupled with the elimination of many tax loopholes. I don't know for sure, but I imagine the net effect of this would be more net taxes paid by corporations. If Obama is serious about deficit reduction, he won't allow the share of taxes corporations pay to decrease. However, this plan does have positive effects on business. A) More clarity in the tax code will allow businesses to use less resources trying to find the optimal tax structure. Those resources can be used to invest in other projects. B) Many of the loopholes on the chopping block allow corporations deduct costs incurred when jobs and plants are created abroad. By eliminating that loophole, people believe that corporations will be more likely to produce and invest domestically, improving the economy state-side. The loopholes are significant, because many much more progressive nations have lower corporate tax rates and still maintain global competitiveness (see: Sweden, Norway).\n\nC) **THE FISCAL CLIFF (SEQUESTRATION)** - This is the largest concern, politically and economically right now. The fiscal cliff that people believe is going to hit on January 1, 2013 is primarily spending cuts and tax increases scheduled to automatically go into effect at that time. During the 2010 budget negotiations, because Congress was unable to reach a deficit reduction agreement, they signed a bill into law that will automatically cut a trillion from defense, roughly $1 trillion from entitlement spending, and will allow the Bush tax cuts for all Americans expire. This is called sequestration. The idea was that if programs valued by both democrats and republicans were on the chopping block, they would both be more incentivized to come to the negotiating table. The worry is now that they will be unable to cooperate and will allow these cuts togo into effect. These cuts are deep enough to cause a second recession. It isn't really a \"cliff\" and won't happen immediately, but if all of the measures in the sequestration go into effect, it will hurt. I don't believe either side would want to see this happen. Congress has three choices:\n\n* They can prevent some of the spending cuts and tax hikes to go into effect. On the plus side, this would mean the economy would continue to grow in the short term, preventing immediate danger. On the downside, this doesn't address the growing deficit, which would continue to grow. The more money we owe as a nation, the higher interest we'll begin to pay. This leads us towards Greece.\n\n* They can let the sequestration occur. On the downside, the drastic cuts in spending and increases in tax would assuredly halt economic growth and create another recession. On the upside, we cut the budget deficit in half, immediately. \n\n* The third option is a \"Grand Bargain,\" which would find the middle ground. It will most likely contain a mixture of spending cuts and tax hikes. Taxes will probably be raised on those making more than $250,000/yr, while not raised for middle Americans. Defense and Entitlement Programs (such as Social Security and Medicare/aid) will likely see significant, but not traumatic cuts. The only real sticking point preventing this agreement from happening is the tax hikes for those making over $250,000. Many Republicans have signed a pledge to never raise taxes, and believe that only raising taxes on those making money is class warfare and socialism. I think despite that resistance, this is still most likely to occur. Now that he does not need to win an election, Obama can basically say, \"if you don't allow me to raise taxes on the rich, I'll just let the taxes go up for everyone.\" The Republicans really don't have a response, because they cannot attempt to blame it on Obama in the next election, and they don't want to take the flak for allowing taxes to go up. It's basically compromise or die.\n\n\nUltimately, I think some sort of bargain will be reached, and disaster averted. It probably won't be the \"Grand Bargain\" many hope for, but it will be enough to prevent this debate from happening again in the near future. I personally hope they simplify the tax code for everyone, raise taxes on the rich (with tax hikes on all once the economy is booming), cut defense spending drastically, and reform entitlement spending so that costs stemming from those programs won't continue to grow exponentially. I don't think all of that will get done, but I don't think we'll hit the \"fiscal cliff\" either. \n\nEDIT: Formatting"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2yrxfl | if nasa tests their new rocket with 3.5 million pounds of force, how do they stop the rocket from crumpling, or shooting off? | _URL_0_
That's a lot of force... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2yrxfl/eli5if_nasa_tests_their_new_rocket_with_35/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpcdkrc",
"cpcqdq5"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"See the giant piece of concrete in front of the rocket? That's sunk in the ground, and while it doesn't weigh 3.5 million pounds, the reactionary force resisting the rocket's push is equal to 3.5 million pounds. As for why the rocket doesn't crumple, the rocket is basically packed solid with fuel, and designed to resist the force trying to push the walls of the rocket apart, which isn't as strong as you might imagine since the rocket is a shaped charge that is designed to explode toward the rear.",
"Its nose isn't pushing on the concrete anchor. It's mounted to the ground/anchor just like it would be mounted to another rocket while standing up. Since it's designed not to crumple when attached to another rocket, it isn't crumpling during the test."
]
} | [] | [
"http://i.imgur.com/s1MbS74.gifv"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3nsem7 | difference between a microcontroller and an embedded system | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3nsem7/eli5_difference_between_a_microcontroller_and_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvquvlf"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A microcontroller is a small computer with everything it needs to perform computation--RAM, long-term memory, processing, etc.\n\nAn embedded system is a computer system with a processor (possibly a microcontroller) hooked up to various electrical and/or mechanical components to perform some task directly as part of a larger system, without conventional user interface (e.g. keyboard, mouse, monitor).\n\nSo you could have a microcontroller doing non-embedded work if you hook it up to a conventional user interface, or you could have an embedded system that is powered by a non-integrated microprocessor with discrete chips for RAM, I/O, etc. Very often microcontrollers will be the choice for embedded systems, though, and typically the use for microcontrollers will be embedded systems. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2yu9ch | bounty hunters and bail bonds, how do they work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2yu9ch/eli5_bounty_hunters_and_bail_bonds_how_do_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpczs85"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Your brother gets arrested and needs you to bail him out for $10,000. But you don't have $10k.\n\nSo you come to me, the bail bondsman. You give me, say, $1,000 (10%), and I'll put my own $10k up to bail out your brother. When he shows up to court, the state gives me back my money, and I keep your thousand bucks. Everyone's happy.\n\nBut wait, you say your brother didn't show up to court? He ran off across state lines? Now I'm down $10k. I hire a bounty hunter to go find him in the next state over, arrest him, and bring him back to court, so I get my money back, minus whatever I paid the bounty hunter. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5bv0tz | why are there voter registration deadlines in the us? | What was the original reason for enacting deadlines on voter registration in the US? Wouldn't you want the system designed to allow any eligible person to vote, or are there good reasons for those deadlines? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5bv0tz/eli5_why_are_there_voter_registration_deadlines/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9rh8la",
"d9riy0u"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The time is required to verify that you do, indeed, seem eligible to vote; and to prepare lists for each polling place of everyone who's eligible to vote there.",
"A lot of that depends on the state. My state you can register the day you vote. You just show your ID basically."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
68vvid | how do charities get away with not spending donated money on the designated purpose? | Who/what regulates what % of the money goes where? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/68vvid/eli5_how_do_charities_get_away_with_not_spending/ | {
"a_id": [
"dh1owdk",
"dh1ox7z",
"dh1p0r1",
"dh1p4q4",
"dh20lph"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"operating costs. Some charities need people to actually manage where the money goes, how it gets spent, it cant all be 100% volunteer hours for everything so there will need to be some employees.\n\nWithout these kinds of people and employees, the money donated may never reach its intended destination.",
"It depends on the country and regulations involved. Pretty much all charities have some expense that's not for the designated purpose... salaries, office rent, office supplies, etc.\n\nIn most countries, their financial reports are a matter of public record so the people donating can see where the money goes.",
"Charities are largely unregulated. So long as they don't make fraudulent claims, they can spend their money pretty much however they like.\n\nAlso, designated purpose is pretty fuzzy. A charity set out to feed the homeless, but they need to do a lot of other things to make that happen. They need staff, they need management, they need fundraising, and other overhead to meet their goals. It is hard to draw a line where there designated purpose ends and fraud begins.",
"Most charities in the US are what are called 501(c)(3) organizations, which comes from the section of the law where they are defined. A 501(c)(3) organization is a non-profit organization that is not allowed to lobby and is organized for charitable, religious, educational, scientific, or literary purposes (or for testing for public safety, fostering amateur sports competition or preventing cruelty to children or animals).\n\nUsually such organizations have a board of directors and executive director. Usually either the board or the executive director will determine the budget, including what % of the money goes where. The money is pretty much allowed to go anywhere as long as it's for the organization's stated purposes or for keeping the organization running (payroll, development, etc.). \n\n501(c)(3) organizations have to file special tax forms indicating how the money was spent, so interested groups can usually find out how a charity spends money. In fact, many groups do this routinely and rank charities based on how much money actually goes directly to the cause they promote.",
"Depends what you mean by \"designated purpose.\" There are many donations that come with all sorts of restrictive in terms of when, where, and for what items it can be used for. Often these have to be accounted for both in reporting back to the fonating agency as well as accounted for in annual audits.\n\nIf you are asking why part of the money you donate online to feeding the homeless goes to pay the salary of the people who work there, it is because that's what it takes to feed the homeless. The money doesn't turn from annonline credit card payment to a calorie in someone's diet. It turns into an agency that provides the service, adheres to local regulations, builds partnerships with local agencies to reach the most people possible, hosts events so that it can keep feeding people next year, trains volunteers, manages payroll, negotiates deals with food providers, maintains a kitchen, manages annual audits, etc.\n\nAs for deciding what percentage is appropriate to go where, typically:\n\nAn unpaid board of directors (who often are bug donors themselves and therefore invested in a well run company) choose an executive director/ceo, who is responsible for deciding the most appropriate use of resources. That is then reported out on publically accessible tax filings (_URL_0_ you can see them all for free). It is then up to the public, major donors, institutional funders etc to decide whether they agree that the impact is appropriate to their contribution.\n\nThere is still the rare case of fraud like in any business, but given the required public transparency, audits, and the fact that unpaid people are the ones legally on the hook (generally diminishing as much as possible conflicts of interest), these cases are pretty rare. Unfortunately because they sre rare, they get a lot of press when they happen.\n\nTldr: in most case a ceo/ed decides how the money is best used, who in turn is held accountable by a board of directors, an auditor, major donors, and the general public."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"guidestar.com"
]
] |
|
ft9hvn | if you fired a gun from a moving train,what happen to the bullet? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ft9hvn/eli5_if_you_fired_a_gun_from_a_moving_trainwhat/ | {
"a_id": [
"fm5qxfy"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Um, it would leave the barrel and head towards whatever is in front of the muzzle?\n\nIn the wild west people fired from trains all the time. Sure didn't stop the bullets from killing people who weren't on the train. Watch a western movie..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
a99on1 | what is the difference between head voice and falsetto? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a99on1/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_head_voice/ | {
"a_id": [
"echj8z9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Nothing. I am a music education major. They are interchangeable, you use head voice when trying to explain to someone new to singing so they can get a visual, this also helps with learning how to switch to the falsetto. \nSide note: only makes have a falsetto. That is due to the puberty that they go through. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1rwfi3 | why do most news websites use sans-serif typefaces instead of serif typefaces which are easier to read? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rwfi3/eli5_why_do_most_news_websites_use_sansserif/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdrmsvn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"As far as I know, serif fonts are only easier to read in print. On a computer screen, sans-serif is more readable, since the resolution is smaller."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1xog3d | does making a better graphics card cost more for the company? is making a 780ti more resource-intensive than making a 760? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xog3d/eli5_does_making_a_better_graphics_card_cost_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfd64j5",
"cfd6a8e"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"There are additional components. But the cost is in research and development. The price is determined by what the market will bear.",
"Yes, from several factors. A higher end GPU will generally have a larger physical chip inside of it. These chips are manufactured from large silicon wafers. If your chip is very large then you can't fit as many on each wafer and wafers don't come cheap. Sometimes the same chip design will be used on several card models, though. This still winds up making the higher end ones more expensive--only some of the chips will make it through the manufacturing process without errors. Sometimes the chip manufacturer will release a model that has, say, 1/8 of the chip disabled and they set it up so that they can choose which 1/8 of the chip to disable after the chip is manufactured--some chips will have no errors and can be sold as the higher end model but some will have a defect that forces them to be sold as the lower model.\n\nAlso, higher end GPUs tend to have more of other components. For example, a flagship card may have 4 GB of video memory while the lower one has only 2 GB. The card manufacturer has to buy/make and install more memory on the higher-end card. Same is true for other components, like voltage regulators and the like. A physically bigger card just has more stuff on it.\n\nAnother big cost that needs to be considered is the development costs. It probably costs a similar amount to develop the higher end and mid range card, but if they sell a lot more of the mid range card then that development cost gets spread out over a larger number of sales.\n\nAll of that said, though, the profit margin is probably higher on the high-end cards than on the low-end cards. Nothing wrong with that, though--those profits go into developing the company and coming up with the next new design. People are willing to pay the higher prices so the companies keep charging them. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5u3yso | why fake news is not illegal? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5u3yso/eli5_why_fake_news_is_not_illegal/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddr5h89",
"ddr5iji",
"ddr5k5x",
"ddr5ma8",
"ddr5uxx"
],
"score": [
15,
3,
8,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"(US perspective)\n\nBecause the 1st Amendment guarantees freedom of speech and press. It is not appropriate for the government to take on the role of deciding what speech is okay and what speech isn't. \n\nHowever, we do have libel and slander laws that protect people who can prove they were harmed by false statements. ",
"Because the first amendment gives everyone very, very broad latitude to say whatever they want. There are plenty of privately run organizations that assess news sources for truthfulness and quality.",
" > why aren't there any governing bodies that ensure that media is legitimate\n\nLike in China or North Korea? The question is who decides what is fake news? You and I might have differing opinions of what constitutes fake news. Giving one group the power to decide what is fake and what isn't leads to terrible problems. \n\nAlso, the 1st amendment guarantees freedom of the press. That means the press can write whatever they want even if it isn't true.",
"Why would it be illegal for me to start a website called SterlingNews and write whatever I want in it? Is it my responsibility to make sure nobody believes me? \n\nIf you want the technical reason, that'd be the 1st amendment: \n\n\"Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;\"\n\n",
"24/h news is hard. Its also often slow. The internet is fast. It can also be wrong. People see ~~facts~~ words that confirm what the already believed. Those beliefs are personal, but also regional, economical, and religious.\n\n News professionals are not impervious to personal bias, and that will reflect on whats reported, verified, or not.\n\nAll this to say, today you cannot trust a source or even two. You need fuckin 4 just to be reasonably comfortable... even then its tough because too much information mixed with misinformation skews things...\n\nGood luck on your search for an answer "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3jl366 | when you turn the nob on a sink and change the temperature, what are the actual mechanics going on behind the scenes that causes the change in temperature? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3jl366/eli5_when_you_turn_the_nob_on_a_sink_and_change/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuq61na"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Basically there are two sources of water coming to the sink (via two different pipes). One water source is hot and comes from your water heater/boiler, the other water source is cold and comes directly from your municipality's water supply.\n\nWhen you adjust the temperature via the tap, it basically just controls the mix of water coming from the hot and cold water sources. If you set it to extreme hot, only water from the hot pipe is allowed through the tap. If you set it to extreme cold, only water from the cold pipe is allowed through. If you set it somewhere in the middle, you get a mix of water from the hot and cold water pipes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
37f0to | how is 9/11 perceived and understood in countries other than the united states? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37f0to/eli5_how_is_911_perceived_and_understood_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"crm64ec",
"crm70rb"
],
"score": [
4,
8
],
"text": [
"Well, as a world traveler \"serious\" , You get the same reasons Americans generally give... everything from inside job.. to terrorist's.\n\nBut everyone agrees .. it was an attack that changed the world.",
"I was living in Germany during 9/11 and 22 at the time. Not in military. People were more than sympathetic. There are plenty of Muslims where I was and they were very nice and sympathetic too. It was weird being there with all that was going on here. But for months when people found out I was American they would say how sorry they were. Germans, very cool folk. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1i79da | mosquito bites | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1i79da/eli5_mosquito_bites/ | {
"a_id": [
"cb1ofqr",
"cb1pjb9",
"cb1qk89"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
16
],
"text": [
"I think I learnt about this somewhere. When a mosquito bites you, it doesn't want you to feel that it's biting you so it first injects its saliva into you. The saliva works as an anesthetic, but it is foreign so your body reacts to it and sends cells to the area to fight off the foreign contaminant. The same way that when you get a wound you feel pain; when you get bitten you feel the irritation so your body can alert your brain. \n\nI'm not 100% sure, but I'm pretty sure that's how it works. ",
"Everyone is allergic to Mosquito spit just a little bit.",
"Blood is pretty thick for a tiny little proboscis (sucker nose) like a mosquito has. So when she puts her proboscis in you (and yes, only female mosquitos bite), she also leaves some of her spit behind, because it's an anticoagulant. That's a chemical that makes your blood less thick, so she can drink more as quickly as possible.\n\nBy a weird accident of biology, something about mosquito saliva makes our bodies think we're having a localized allergic reaction. So our bodies go into normal allergy mode, and release histamine. That histamine makes your blood vessels dilate, so you get a little bump. And they make you itch like crazy."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
451at7 | when alcohol is applied to an open wound/sore, why does it hurt for a few seconds then stop? when a second round of disinfectant is applied to the same place a few minutes later, why does that not hurt (as much as the first application)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/451at7/eli5_when_alcohol_is_applied_to_an_open_woundsore/ | {
"a_id": [
"czui3at"
],
"score": [
39
],
"text": [
"Our skin has special 'sensors' that alert us when they are exposed to high temperatures. Alcohol lowers the temperature at which they activate - low enough for our own body temperature to activate these sensors and trigger a burning feeling. \n\n_URL_0_\n\nAs for the lesser pain during a second application of alcohol disinfectant, it could be that the brain is already 'primed' to ignore the burning feeling from these sensors after the first application. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://chemistry.about.com/od/medicalhealth/a/Why-Does-Alcohol-Burn-On-A-Cut-Or-Wound.htm"
]
] |
||
smigv | why reaganomics/ trickle-down economics/ conservative economic policies don't work? | I've been socially progressive for as long as I can remember but economics has always baffled me.
The basic conservative argument is that taxing the rich too much is detrimental to the economy since they spend a lot of money buying their yachts/ mansions/ BMWs. According to them, taxing the wealthy would only drive them away to countries that tax them less and spend their money there. That argument does make sense.
What am I missing here? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/smigv/eli5_why_reaganomics_trickledown_economics/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4f735t",
"c4f73js",
"c4f74jw",
"c4f76t0"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You don't need to rely on abstract arguments in economics; you can look at how real world economies have actually worked. When you do that, it is not very clear that increasing taxes has resulted in the rich all running away.",
"Why conservative economic policy doesn't work is debatable. A very simple answer is assuming a free market economy does work then society isn't willing to wait for it to work and see people suffering until it does work.\n\n > The basic conservative argument is that taxing the rich too much is detrimental to the economy since they spend a lot of money buying their yachts/ mansions/ BMWs.\n\nThis is different and not a basic conservative argument. It is an example of the broken window fallacy. If I smash my window does it hurt the economy? After all the window maker gets a job fixing it and buys bread with the money I pay him and gets a haircut at my barber shop and I get paid for that haircut that fixed my window. The answer is yes it does hurt society because society has lost a window.\n\nA basic conservative argument is that infringing on the free market creates deadweight loss - basically when supply does not meet demand (or vice-versa) due to stress put on the economic market by governing bodies. For example I can produce 10 apples at a cost of 1$ each. I should sell them at 1$ each (if I sell them at $1.05 each another firm will start up to drive the price down and $.95 dollars I will shut down). If the government makes me sell them at any price other than 1$ each either I (a producer) or the consumer will be missing out on money. Okay so you may have to be closer to 20 and in an undergrad degree to understand that...sorry. tl;dr less stuff gets traded so less people are happy.\n\n_URL_0_",
"What more proof do you need than the last 30+ years of history, since Reagan?",
"Another term used to describe these policies is supply side economics. Build it and they will come would be a good phrase is describe this way of thinking. The supply side has become very efficient and requires less work to produce more. Lower labor costs have led to less income, which in turn has affected aggregate demand. Earned income was replaced by increasing credit which helped tide many people over, but due to jobs not returning it made many people worse off in the long term. Where the policies have failed is that society has not found productive uses for the people displaced by increasing efficiency."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadweight_loss"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
1kkv5k | why do black people have extremely curly hair? | Not all black people. But a large majority of them have super curly hair. I'm not racist either this is a serious question | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kkv5k/eli5_why_do_black_people_have_extremely_curly_hair/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbpyubi",
"cbq1e46",
"cbq3h0e",
"cbq48xe",
"cbq74y9",
"cbqbmav",
"cbqemsb"
],
"score": [
16,
208,
37,
3,
2,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"It could be because that much curly/frizzy hair protects the scalp/skin from UV rays and sun damage, for one, which might be important if you live in a place which is very close to the equator/with a lot of direct sun. Or because it gives some protection from heat by allowing more passage of air. The alternate question would be why do non-African people have straight hair? What advantage does that give, if any? Or is it just a by-product of other things that has no real importance. Is the same thing true for black people's hair? I don't think anyone actually has a definitive answer for any of this.",
"Straight hair that lies flat tends to hold in heat. That's an advantage in cold climates.\n\nCurly hair allows heat to escape while still providing protection from the sun to the skin underneath. That's an advantage in hot climates.\n\nMelanin in skin (the part that makes it dark) tends to block what's needed to make vitamin D while offering some protection from sunburn - this is why people who live closer to the polar regions have far lighter skin: less danger of sunburn, and since they get so much less sunlight, they need to produce vitamin D much easier. People who live closer to the equator get a lot more sunlight, so they have all the vitamin D from sunlight they need, but the protection from sunburn is far more important.",
"Well, as a barber, I know that your hair's curl/wave/straightness is actually determined by the angle and shape of the follical itself. The opening from which your hair emerges determines what pattern your hair will lay in. As for the evolutionary reason, I'm not sure.",
"Side track question that might be relevant:\n\nMy hair's straight as a ruler but pubes are curly as heck. Is this the same for everyone and if so, why is that?",
"Fun fact: Dependent on which shape your hair follicle makes determines what your type would be, if yoou have straight hair, your follicles would be straight, I have a spaced out natural wave, my hair follicles have a wave, also you can have multiple shaped follicles all over your head and body.",
"How would asking this question make you racist?",
"Can't believe we're living in a time where you have to point out you're not racist when asking a simple question about a race. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2ssmhp | what makes the cinnamon challenge (teaspoon of cinnamon) so hard to complete? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ssmhp/eli5_what_makes_the_cinnamon_challenge_teaspoon/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnsh448"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Here's a good explanation from about 2 years ago: _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zy6pc/eli5_why_is_the_cinnamon_challenge_so_bad/"
]
] |
||
qa9s8 | how does male pattern baldness work and is it fixable? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/qa9s8/eli5_how_does_male_pattern_baldness_work_and_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3w02rl",
"c3w371l"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Based on their genes, some men have a head that is designed to stop growing hair after a while in certain regions (the front, the top).\n\nThose who don't like it can use a special medicine to make the hair grow again. The medicine is called Rogaine.",
"(Not official, just what I'm familiar with. This is general idea so do not quote) Each strand of hair on the average human head lasts around 5 years, then falls out. These are replaces daily with new hairs to replace those from 5 years ago, etc. As you grow older, your scalp is not as defined and so the regrowth of hair from a cavity called a follicle (the 'hole' that each hair sits in) is not as often present. [A.D.A.M, 2009]\nI believe MPB usually occurs genetically, for the most part, passed on from your mothers genes. So, if your mother's father (maternal grandfather) is bald there is a good chance you'd be balled too. \nNote: This is assuming you are male, of course, whereas you could just be asking for complete curiosity. Females have similar affects yet under normal conditions their hair will not undergo the same effect as females general notice 'thinning' of hair (amount of strands of hairs are less numerous spaced out over the total top of your head)\nSorry for any grammatical error's; it's late here. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
ft9nq8 | given that the immune system is so "smart" when it comes to fighting new germs, why does it still go into panic mode every time it meets the same harmless allergens? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ft9nq8/eli5_given_that_the_immune_system_is_so_smart/ | {
"a_id": [
"fm5rxvu",
"fm5svhj",
"fm5tvuu"
],
"score": [
16,
15,
6
],
"text": [
"The immune system is \"smart\" in that it can recognize antigens it has seen before as well as new ones. The same systems are used for fighting allergens. Your body doesn't know the inflammation it caused almost killed you. Your immunoglobulins don't care you can't breathe. They have a job to do, and that doesn't change based on factors outside of their perception.",
"The immune system isn't smart. It's *ruthless,* and there's a big difference.\n\nAnything your immune system doesn't recognize as belonging to or in your body, it attacks. Allergies are caused by an over-response to a substance that does belong, provoking an immune response.",
"The immune system is smart like a computer is smart it also means it is dumb as a computer is dumb when faced with not enough information it basically goes into panic mode and throws everything at an allergen - _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/zk_oUk0bwxs"
]
] |
||
827nbv | how did shipbuilders raise the masts on ships of the line, eg. hms victory | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/827nbv/eli5how_did_shipbuilders_raise_the_masts_on_ships/ | {
"a_id": [
"dv806ez"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You hold one end of the mast (the bottom) in place, then attach a rope to the other end (the top). Run the rope over a pulley on the top of a second mast, and then pull the rope. The rope will pull up on the mast, pivoting it until it's vertical.\n\nThe second mast does not need to be as tall as the mast you're uprighting, but it helps. The taller the second mast, the less force you have to pull the rope with."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2uegi0 | what gives atoms their various properties? | Glancing at the period table I can discern no pattern. Can you predict what behaviour an atom will have because of the balance of subatomic particles in the system? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2uegi0/eli5_what_gives_atoms_their_various_properties/ | {
"a_id": [
"co7nngi",
"co7qn11",
"co7rp57"
],
"score": [
10,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Yes, broadly speaking. \n\nAtoms gain their properties due to their valence. Learning about this is basically most of the first semester of a college chemistry course, but the short version is:\n\nAtoms are basically clouds of electrons surrounding a core of protons and neutrons. The clouds of electrons behave in a way that is random, but overall very predictable, and they try to form a pattern that resembles a shell of electrons composed of sets of four pairs to make an octet.\n\n Bigger atoms have many shells of eight, smaller ones may have only one (or fewer than one complete shell) but it's only the outermost shell that really matters for bonding and chemical properties. When two elements bond, they share an electron or two to fulfil their octets. \n\nDifferent atoms as you go down a row of the periodic table have different numbers of valience electrons in their outermost shell. These are what make atoms react differently. Lithium, sodium, potassium, etc, have one atom in their outermost valience shell - that means they want to bond very much with something that can fill their shell. If you put sodium in water, it rips the water apart, and causes an explosion as the oxygen and hydrogen heat up. \n\nLikewise, flourine, chlorine, iodine, etc, all have seven electrons in their outer shell - they want badly to fill with things with only one electron, like hydrogen. That's why these elements can make such powerful acids - it's very easy for them to steal a hydrogen from water. \n\nCarbon has four electons. It (and silicon, to a lesser degree) is the whore of the elemnts. It loves to bond with a lot of stuff becuase there's so many ways it can make pairs. Oxygen has six, so it loves to double bond (share two pairs of electrons) with carbon, or one each with hydrogen (to make water.)\n\nFinally the nobel gasses come complete with eight already. That's why they hardly ever bond with *anything*. \n\n\nThere's more to this explanation than just that - radioactivity, transition elements, metals, different levels of valence shells, different types of bonds, subatomic forces, resonance, etc, but that is basically an entire chem course worth of information. But valence electrons are the most important thing overall. ",
"The periodic table is full of patterns.\n\nThe 'magic numbers' of chemistry are\n\n* 2 \n* 2 + 6 = 8\n* 2 + 6 + 10 = 18 \n* 2 + 6 + 10 + 16 = 36\n* 2 + 6 + 10 + 16 + 18 + 18 = 54\n* 2 + 6 + 10 + 16 + 18 + 18 + 18 = 86\n\nElectrons travel in 'shells' and it takes 2 to fill the first shell, 6 to fill the second, 10 to fill the third, 16 to fill the fourth, and 18 to fill shells the fifth/sixth/seventh shells.\n\nAtoms strongly 'like' to have perfectly filled shells. If need be, they'll share, give, or take electrons from other atoms to get perfectly filled shells.\n\n-----\n\nThe rightmost column made of Noble Gases. They already have perfect shells. For the most part, Noble Gas atoms don't react with other atoms.\n\nThe left-most column is alkali metals. They have perfect shells plus one extra electron. They readily give away this extra electron to drop down to having perfect shells. Atoms in the left column tend to go 'boom' in water. (Look up sodium and water videos on YouTube.)\n\nCarbon is part of column 14. At 6, carbon is 4 away from the magic number in the right hand column. Carbon needs a whopping 4 electrons to get to shell perfection, and makes all sorts of electron swaps to get there. Since carbon can make four electron swaps, it can make a huge number of compounds and is one of the key ingredients in the complex chemicals that make life possible. \n\nColumn 11 is copper, silver, and gold. These are all easy-to-shape metals that conduct electricity. They're all commonly used in electronic devices.",
"This will probably get deleted as an improper answer, but whatever. Are you familiar with the [Khan Academy](_URL_0_)?\n\nYou can start the basic chemistry videos and it will explain your question in detail. With that said, there are already a couple of good explanations here."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.khanacademy.org/"
]
] |
|
1lz0xm | how did world war 2 catalyze an economic surge in the us, but afghanistan, iraq and now possibly syria put us further in debt? | I'm not very knowledgeable on finance/economics and my history is rusty but if I remember correctly, WWII was a big factor in dragging us out of the Great Depression, right? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lz0xm/eli5_how_did_world_war_2_catalyze_an_economic/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc45e7q",
"cc45lun",
"cc47jr8",
"cc48wj2"
],
"score": [
14,
5,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The thing about WW2 was that europe was in ashes. The only ally that had the resources and factory capabilities to aid rebuilding it was the US, so with the marshal scheme most of europe was in debt to the US, for aiding in the rebuild. Theres no such thing happening in the middle east. ",
"Keep in mind that WWII allowed us to create a vast number of factory jobs. We needed tanks, planes, cars, guns, bombs, etc... Now we have all of those resources so no jobs (or minimal jobs) are created. When the jobs were there, people made money, they paid taxes, they put their money into their local communities (which was the only thing they could do since there wasn't any Internet spending or huge chain stores), etc... All of this led to a surge in economic activity. This is not going to happen with Afghanistan, Iraq, or Syria. It's just us getting involved.",
"The outbreak of WWII saw a massive increase in government spending and investment. Huge amounts of money was poured into the industrial sector in order to meet the demand for guns, planes, tanks, trucks, munitions, etc. This in turn created huge demands for natural resources: oil, wood, rubber, metal ores, etc. The war created a massive demand and the government spent huge amounts of money in order to meet this demand, which spurred massive job growth for these positions.\n\nOn top of that, an army was needed, and the government spent even more money training up this army. This means soldiers, pilots, navymen, engineers, medics, drivers, electricians, radiomen, and more. This is analogous to an investment in job training. When the war ended, hundreds of thousands of young men returned to America with trade skills, discipline, and job experience that could be readily put to use in the factories and industries that were no longer making weapons of war.\n\nNext is taxes; taxes were high in the war. Pretty much every war from the mid-20th century and before required tax hikes of some kind to help pay for the war. In Canada, income tax was instituted during the First World War to help pay for it. Along with the taxes were War Bonds, which helped pay for the war out of the pockets of Americans (who were now making money thanks to the new jobs). War bonds are basically giving the government money in promise of that money back with interest. So the years following the end of the war saw a lot of government money going back into civilian hands as these bonds were paid out.\n\nAll of these factors, and probably others that I missed because I an not a historian or an economist, together led to the economic prosperity of the 1950s. People will remark that taxes were slashed greatly in the 50s and that's true - because the war was over so the government didn't need the extra revenue. It could've kept the taxes high because it incurred a colossal amount of debt as a result of the war. But the economic prosperity of the 50s meant they could start paying down that debt.\n\nContrast that to the Afghan/Iraq war and you'll notice there isn't an increase in government investment in the infrastructure, because the military-industrial complex is already firmly entrenched. The factories that make bombs and guns and tanks are already made and churning out products. So while there was probably an increase in production, it doesn't match the production boost that was needed before WWII. Secondly, the Bush-era tax cuts meant the government was bringing in less revenue whilst spending more of its money, and borrowing it, to wage these two wars. Its been incurring tremendous amount of debt because of these wars, but it has yet to see any decent returns on it. The boons of WWII only came about when America settled into post-war mode...and that has yet to happen for America, and I doubtful it ever will. ",
"The money spent and % of GDP was much higher in WWII. We're talking about $4 trillion(adjusting for inflation and such) in WWII spending compared to about $1 trillion. WWII spending counted for at least 35% of GDP* while post 9/11 wars amounted to just 1.2%, even if you include all of defense spending it is still only about 4-5%. So while the numbers thrown about with the wars costing us a ton, it is still a drop in the bucket.\n\n*GDP(Gross Domestic Product)=The value of officially recognized goods/services produced by a country. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8s857l | now that people can pay to get youtube premium and avoid ads, how does youtube pay creators? does it check the ones you, as a premium user, watch and treat them as if you were a normal user or are we going to see a decrease in youtubers' revenue? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8s857l/eli5_now_that_people_can_pay_to_get_youtube/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0x8f3s"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"A portion of what you pay YouTube gets split between the creators of the videos you watch depending on how much time you spend on each. \n\nIt's supposedly vastly more profitable for creators of long videos, while very short ones might see a net loss. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9g4dj2 | why do states like west virginia and tennessee go so red in presidential elections, but have a good chance of going blue in the senate elections? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9g4dj2/eli5_why_do_states_like_west_virginia_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"e61ch7p"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"My understanding of it is most likely the support of state rights ends up being the difference. Many people who are liberal still want control of their laws at the state level, voting Republican federally generally gives more rights to the states and less power to the Federal Govt (in theory). This allows the states to decide majority of their laws with less interference from the Federal level (once again, in theory)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
83rim1 | why is it that when buildings topple, they always fall vertically and collapse on themselves? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/83rim1/eli5_why_is_it_that_when_buildings_topple_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvk0im6",
"dvk0jns"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Extremely careful planning by the demolition experts that toppled it. Demolished buildings are usually near other stuff that we want to keep, so imploding them on themselves is the easiest way to take them out. \n\nI assume you're also from Kentucky and watched that building in Frankfort come down today. ",
"Because they are designed to do so. Engineers design for safety, and a key thing is prepping for failure, so if it fails then it fails in a way that will cause the least damage.\n\nSo its standard building code"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
ft183q | why do news interviews conducted via satellite experience noticable lag while video chat programs allow for multiple users without delays? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ft183q/eli5_why_do_news_interviews_conducted_via/ | {
"a_id": [
"fm4f6kn",
"fm4fg2u",
"fm4fx7q",
"fm5c6yy"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The via satellite part most likely. Takes time to go up and back down right? Video chat isn't doing that.",
"There's inherent latency with satellite communications. Most chat programs like discord or Skype are not over satellite. They run across a series of tubes known as the I tenet and while individual users may experience latency due to their local connection not everyone will. In order to bypass the minimums here I've tried to over explain what's really the simple answer...different communication mediums have different latency. I mean you ever seen the video latency over rfc1149?",
"Newscasters still use actual satellite connections much of the time. It allows them to setup a dedicated connection that is completely in their control, regardless of where they are. If they started trying to use cell towers for lower latency, they could run into staggered bandwidth problems and have an inconsistent quality.",
"Even if you had the worlds fastest satellite connection you still have delays due to the speed of light. Signal has to go up and come back down. Depending on your location on earth the signal may have to go up, bounce around to multiple satellites and come back down, increasing delay."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
40k2ee | would a dead body decompose in an air tight seal? (nsfw) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40k2ee/eli5_would_a_dead_body_decompose_in_an_air_tight/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyurf4x"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The bacteria and other micro fauna that cause decomposition are already on the surface of your body, mouth and digestive tract. Being in an airtight container just means the anaerobic bacteria have an advantage."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3kyci5 | have any governmemts made any serious attempts to come up with ways to deal with an alien invasion? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kyci5/eli5_have_any_governmemts_made_any_serious/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv1j3wm",
"cv1jbyy",
"cv1l2dv"
],
"score": [
16,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Quite simply any race capable of getting from another planet to earth will be so technologically more advanced than us that there is no point bothering. Monkeys would have a better chance of preventing a \"human invasion\" on their turf than we would have of fighting a starfaring civilization.",
"If they had evidence that one could occur, I'm sure they would.\n\nAt this point, a Zombie apocalypse, or a massive Unicorn stampede would be just as likely a scenario.",
"I would imagine nothing concrete, just simple things to maintain a functioning Government, such as security bunkers, resilient communications etc. Evacuation Plans etc will exist for may built up area's anyhow. Assuming we are attached from creatures from another world, were not going to be to knowledgeable about good counter tactics, so if we feel the need to fight back, were just lob everything at them and hope it works. After that gorilla tactics seem to work well against invading forces."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8ex7aj | why are objects sometimes visible only from the corner of the eye, but seem to disappear when we look in that direction? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ex7aj/eli5_why_are_objects_sometimes_visible_only_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxyud1d"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"There are two types of photoreceptors in human eyes, rods (which detect general lightness and darkness) and cones (which detect color). Near the center of our retina we have a lot of cones so we get a lot of good visual data about color and produce a quality image of what we are looking at. As you get further from the center of the retina, the amount of cones goes down and rods goes up. This makes us really good at noticing any subtle change in shadows in the corner of our vision, so we detect movement of something that might be sneaking up on us.\n\nRods are more sensitive to low levels of light (which is why when it is dark you don't see colors as well but can still make out general shapes) so sometimes if it is dark you can see something out of the corner of your eye (where the rods are picking up the little bit of light it is reflecting) but not in the center of your vision (where the cones that aren't quite as sensitive to low light dominate)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4e1if7 | why are individuals given a much lighter sentence if they accept a plea deal and plea guilty versus if a jury finds them guilty? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4e1if7/eli5_why_are_individuals_given_a_much_lighter/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1w6hva",
"d1w6i61",
"d1w6tda",
"d1w6ubs",
"d1w8pis",
"d1wb5zl",
"d1wle5x",
"d1wnagx"
],
"score": [
29,
9,
11,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because that was the agreement, if they plea guilty, they'll face a lighter sentence.\n\nIt's in the interest of the entire justice system for cases to not be bogged down unnecessarily, if someone is willing to not waste the courts time and money proving them guilty then they're rewarded with a slightly more mild sentence.\n\nAlso in some cases the prosecution (people who are against the guy being charged) might not have a 100% solid case so a plea is less \"risk\" from their perspective.",
"Because it saves the crown or the state months worth of time and, more importantly, money that they would otherwise have to spend on a trial. ",
"That is the entire point of the \"deal\" in plea deal. Trials are very expensive for everyone, and at the end of it there is always the chance that the guilty party gets off (from the states perspective) or that i get a harsh punishment deserved or not (from the defendents perspective).\n\nA plea deal in it's purest form is:\n\n \"look, we caught you and we have the evidence. You save us the trouble and uncertainty of a trial, and in return we'll give you a lighter sentence and save your family lawyer costs. Everyone wins... as much as possible given you broke the law\"\n\nSo if someone turns that down, the consequence is that they are gambling freedom (not guilty) with the full original sentence (guilty).\n\nIts like a dealer at a blackjack table looking at his cards, looking at yours, seeing the giant pile of money you bet and saying \"look, you don't know it, but i got you beat. What say you give me half that money, you keep the other half, and we call it a day\"\n\nThe challenge comes when fear of harsh outcomes scares inmocent people into taking a plea deal because they can't risk the punishment that might come if they go to trial and are found guilty. The other problem is that during the negotiation there is an imbalance of power because the state knows how good or weak their case is but the defendant and his attorney may not. So like the blackjack scenario, you don't know if the dealer is bluffing or not.",
"I was watching one of those Dateline murder trial shows. A woman was offered a plea deal of 1 year in prison and a few more years of probation. She decided to take it to trial, was found guilty and sentenced to 2 decades in prision. What I am really wondering is how can there be such a huge difference in sentences for the same crime? Are there not minimums that a court must sentence people to?What about the cost of a few months trial justifies 2 decades of incarceration vs a middle ground between the plea deal (1 year) and the max(20 years)?Does this kind of system not just make it more likely that a person who is not guilty will take the plea anyway out of fear? \n\nedit:words",
"By pleading guilty they show that they acknowledge their guilt and want to take responsibility for it. Also some judges have a \"trial tax\" where they will generally give lighter sentences to someone who didn't go to trial. Also it keeps everything from coming out. If there's a plea then the judge will likely just have a base understanding of the defendant's conduct rather than potentially seeing a victim crying and talking about how horrible the defendant's conduct was. ",
"Let's say I shoot and kill someone.\n\nThe prosecution thinks it might have been murder, but they don't know for sure. They don't know if they can a conviction for murder, or whether in the process of a long, expensive trial, the charges won't get reduced to manslaughter anyway.\n\nAnd honestly, *I* might not know what, if anything I am guilty of. I know I meant to shoot someone, but not being a legal scholar, I can't be sure it was murder, manslaughter, or self defense. I know which one I'm hoping for, but I may not know for sure myself.\n\nSo we negotiate. The prosecution thinks maybe murder, probably manslaughter, probably not self defense. So they offer a plea of manslaughter, basically saying \"we'd rather punish a murderer too lightly than risk them walking free\". If you accept the plea, you are saying \"I'd rather serve a lighter sentence than risk serving a heavier one, regardless of my guilt\".",
"They usually plead guilty to a lesser crime, which in turn has a lesser penalty. Not familiar with the case in question, but they might have offered her the chance to plead guilty to manslaughter, but she was tried and convicted of murder.\n\nJust to mention, both prosecution and defense attorneys love plea bargains because they both get to count them as wins. The prosecution counts it as a win because there was a conviction on the lesser charge. The defense counts it as a win because there wasn't a conviction on the more serious charge.",
"In addition to a \"guaranteed\" conviction, avoiding a trial avoids expenses by the state (and therefore the taxpayer) and reduces the caseload of an already overloaded court system. And in a lot of cases, avoiding a trial means that the victim or their family does not have to testify and be cross-examined by the defense, which can be traumatizing."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
43xgg8 | when you call a phone number and it's disconnected, why does an automated voice start reading out random letters & numbers? | I've heard this a few times once the "disconnected" message is over. It's quite unnerving - "AYE. ZEE. FOOOOUR. SEVEN. EXXX."
Unsure if this happens outside of Australia, but it is weird. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43xgg8/eli5_when_you_call_a_phone_number_and_its/ | {
"a_id": [
"czlrcy6",
"czm3d6u"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Sounds like an error code. It's basically the computers self diagnosis. An administrator could use it to try to lock down what went wrong.",
"I live in the US and know what you're talking about! And there's usually a really loud beep before them? It makes me feel like I'm in a horror movie "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4359uj | what's the difference between spoiled food and fermented food like pickles and kimchi? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4359uj/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_spoiled_food/ | {
"a_id": [
"czfkga5",
"czfkhy7"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Food spoils when certain bacteria eat the food and leave behind nasty waste that people done want to eat. When you pickle food you leave it in salt water and the salt kills off the unwanted bacteria. Everything else in a pickling liquid is usually just for flavor. Its similar to how salting meat and drying it prevents it from spoiling.",
"Fermentation is usually a highly controlled environment (temperature/humidity/pressure) that inhibits any kind of growth which would be harmful to humans. Spoiled food would have mould and other types of bacteria which grow in uncontrolled environments. The environment which fermentation creates makes it difficult for bad things to grow, such as pH levels and alcohol content (in the case of beer). "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4abnr8 | do we sink faster the deeper we go? | I googled it, didn't find anything super conclusive. Do we accelerate the closer we get to the Earth's core, because of water's density? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4abnr8/eli5_do_we_sink_faster_the_deeper_we_go/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0z0gkf",
"d0z0lul"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Yes, if by we you mean people. Not because of water density shifts, water's mostly not compressible. The deepest water is not a very large fraction of the way to the center of the Earth.\n\nPeople are full of air and other things that are less dense than water. Since people are not very strongly constructed, a couple of hundred pounds per square inch pretty effectively compresses them. That of course reduces their volume while maintaining a constant mass. This density shift makes them sink much faster.",
"Are you talking about submarines, or just some guy in a Speedo?\n\nThe air in our lungs compresses more the further down we go. That means you get denser the further down you do, and so yes, your sinking would accelerate. But that matters mostly in the first couple hundred feet. Below that, your lungs are already so compressed that further compression makes very little difference. (Also, below that you are probably already dead anyway).\n\nThis can be dangerous if you take a deep breathe and then propel yourself down by kicking our feet against your own buoyancy. The further down you go, the harder you will find it to surface. Since you had to kick to get down, you might think you just have to stop kicking to come back up, but that is a mistake."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2j4mhq | why do i always seem to have one really long hair growing from my arm? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2j4mhq/eli5why_do_i_always_seem_to_have_one_really_long/ | {
"a_id": [
"cl8dq00"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I'm also interested in the answer to this question"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2sk730 | does eating too much tuna really cause brain damage? | Heard it today, is it true? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2sk730/eli5_does_eating_too_much_tuna_really_cause_brain/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnq873v"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Kinda sorta, maybe, not really. Our fishing waters have trace levels of mercury in them, which is very capable of causing brain damage in humans (in larger amounts). Tuna live quite long and get very big, so not only do they spend a lot of time in mercury-tainted water, they eat lots of smaller fish who also have small amounts of mercury in them. By the time we eat tuna, it has built up a noticeable amount of mercury in itself, which then enters our own system, where mercury does not break down or get removed by our bodies as quickly and easily as most other toxins. As we eat more tuna, the level of mercury in us also increases, but there is still little evidence that the amount of mercury in tuna has noticeable effects on humans."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
xcmtl | how a c note on piano sounds different than a c note on a guitar, even though it's the same frequency | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/xcmtl/eli5_how_a_c_note_on_piano_sounds_different_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5l7h6w",
"c5l7qrb",
"c5l8re7",
"c5laygd"
],
"score": [
44,
8,
30,
2
],
"text": [
"[Timbre](_URL_0_).\n\nThe pitch is the same but the \"color\" of the note is different due to a number of factors including mechanism, resonance and envelope.\n\nSing a note naturally, then sing the same note but make it nasal, then use falsetto. It's all the same pitch but has different tonal color because of how it comes out of your body.",
"Each note occupies a particular frequency (e.g. a middle c is about 262hz). This is the core of any note played by an instrument. \n\nHowever, there are many other frequencies that can be heard along with the core frequency. These are called \"Resonant Frequencies\". These frequencies determine the \"Colour\" of the sound, or in musical terms, \"Timbre\".\n\nA more complex sounding instrument would typically generate a lot more resonant frequencies over a wider range. A good example is the little buzz you hear with each guitar pick and the slight ring after each piano note. Those little extra sounds are resonant frequencies.\n\nHope that wasn't too technical. ",
"Sound is actually a wave, air molecules bouncing against each other, getting close together and far apart, very quickly. How quickly? If you're playing an A below middle C, also called A3, they're doing it 220 times per second! The higher the note, the more times per second they do that. (You said ELI5!) But if I sing an A3, \"aaaaaaah\", and you sing an A3, \"oooooooh\", what makes them sound different, you ask?\n\nWhen you make a sound, you actually make a *whole lot* of waves at different frequencies, all at the same time. Let's say I make a sound at 100 Hz, which means 100 times per second. That also means I make a sound at 200 Hz, 300 Hz, 400 Hz, 500 Hz, 600 Hz, 700 Hz, 800 Hz, 900 Hz, 1000 Hz... you get the idea! They're all multiples of 100 Hz, the first note. That first note at 100 Hz is a G2 (well, it's a bit higher, but let's say it's a G). 200 Hz is an octave above it, so it's a G3. 300 Hz is an octave and a fifth, so it's a D4. 400 Hz is two octaves, so it's a G4. 500 Hz is two octaves and a major third (actually a bit less), so it's a B4. 600 Hz is two octaves and a fifth, so it's a D5. 700 Hz is two octaves and a minor seventh (actually a lot less), so it's an F5. 800 Hz is three octaves, so it's a G5. 900 Hz is three octaves and a major second, so it's an A5. 1000 Hz is three octaves and a major third, so it's a B5. It goes on forever, adding more and more notes! So far, we have G2 (the fundamental frequency of 100 Hz), G3, D4, G4, B4, D5, F5, G5, A5, B5, and it goes on forever!\n\nSo why can't you hear those notes when you sing \"oooooooh\" or \"aaaaaaah\"? The thing is, they're much softer than the main note, the fundamental. You can hear them, but the ear doesn't pick them out by themselves. Instead, these notes become all part of the same note. How loud they are compared to each other is what gives a note its color! So if the fundamental is loud but all the other notes (they're called harmonics) are very soft, you'll get a sound that sounds like \"oooooooh\", but if the other notes are louder, you'll get a sound more like \"aaaaaaah\". The clarinet, for example, has very soft harmonics (in fact, it only has odd harmonics -- 100 Hz, 300 Hz, 500 Hz, but not 200 Hz, 400 Hz, 600 Hz), so it has a more \"oooooooh\" sound. The oboe, on the other hand, has louder harmonics, so it sounds like a duck!\n\nWhen it comes to string instruments like guitars and pianos (pianos have strings inside them), the shape of how the string vibrates is what makes the sound difference. When you pluck the string, you get one kind of shape, and when you hit the string with a little hammer (what happens inside a piano), you get another kind. So the sounds are different. Actually, if you have a guitar handy, you can try plucking the string at different parts and see how the sound changes! If you pluck very close to the end of the string, it sounds almost like a banjo, but if you pluck it right in the middle, you get an almost electronic sound.\n\nThere's one thing I haven't mentioned yet that's also important: the attack and decay. When you first pluck the string, you get a pattern of sounds that lasts only for a little bit -- the sound of the plucking -- and then the sound just resonates for a while and gets softer. That pattern of sounds at the beginning is the attack, and how it gets softer after a while is the decay. The attack is the difference between \"baaaaaah\" and \"gaaaaaah\". It's the consonant at the beginning. It turns out that the attack is very important in hearing different instruments. Some instruments sound very similar other than the attack, and you wouldn't know it because you always hear it! The attack and decay also help make the piano and guitar sound different.\n\nOh, and what frequency is a snare drum? Well, that's a trick question. ;-)\n\n**EDIT:** If you want to see what this harmonic scale is all about -- 100 Hz, 200 Hz, 300 Hz, and so on -- go to this [microtonal synthesizer](_URL_0_) and go to the preset \"Harmonic (C1)\". The fundamental pitch is C1, which is about 32.7 Hz, not 100 Hz, but it goes up to the first 127 harmonics! (That's not forever, but that's because if I made the notes go much higher, there'd be too many of them and my old computer would not be able to handle it.) Notice how they start very far apart -- an octave between C1 and C2 -- but get closer and closer together.",
"When you use a tuning fork to make a sound it creates a sound wave that is like a perfectly curved sine wave. That's why a tuning fork sounds so \"pure\". \n\nBut when different instruments create sounds, their sound waves aren't perfectly curved. The hills and bumps of a given sound wave is what gives every instrument it's own color.\n\nSo when you play a note on the piano and play the same note on the guitar, the sound wave will be cycling back and fourth at the same speed (it's frequency) and that's why those notes have the same pitch. But the unique shape of the sound wave is what makes the piano sound like a piano and a guitar sound like a guitar."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbre"
],
[],
[
"http://offtonic.com/synth/"
],
[]
] |
||
2kgueh | when does an act of self defense turn into assault? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2kgueh/eli5_when_does_an_act_of_self_defense_turn_into/ | {
"a_id": [
"cll5fp4",
"cll5xak",
"cll67ke",
"cll6j7o",
"cll6jb7",
"cll7o2g",
"cllc6bk"
],
"score": [
30,
19,
9,
2,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"When you're no longer in danger, and you're still \"defending yourself\".\n",
"It varies depending on region. Here in the UK, what constitutes \"self defence\" depends on the context. Sometimes, a single punch can go beyond self defence and land the person in trouble, and other times, someone has killed an assailant and gotten away fine with self defence. \n\nBasically, the cut-off point is where you are no longer taking actions to protect yourself from an immediate threat. If if a mugger runs off and you chase him down, push him over and repeatedly kick him in the head, you're going to have a hard time explaining that this was an appropriate response to a perceived immediate threat to you rather than revenge. However if you have your shotgun out and someone states they're going to stab you, then lunges at you with a knife, shooting them dead is clearly self defence as you took a reasonable and proportionate measure to defend yourself against a threat against you. ",
"As others have said: it depends on the law where you are.\n\nUnder UK law you are permitted to use \"reasonable force\" to defend yourself and your property.\n\nThat statement is a little woolly. It basically means \"it's up to the jury to decide whether you went too far\". However:\n\n- If you had something specifically for defence, you're probably in the wrong but things you have to-hand are okay. If you use cut an attacker with your house keys you'll be okay. If you had a knife (or a cricket bat) with you for the purpose you're in trouble. This is a rule of thumb explained at a police Q & A I attended. If you want any finer detail: ask a lawyer.\n\n- Once the danger has passed, you've got to stop. [This was tested quite spectacularly about five years ago.](_URL_0_) (Burglars came into a house. They tied up and threatened to kill one of the people there. However, one person escaped, and told another family member who chased the burglars off, then carried on chasing them and beat him with a cricket bat until the guy had permanent brain injuries and the cricket bat was broken into three.)\n\n- Force used should be proportional to the amount of danger you are in. If a kid tells you give him your wallet or he'll kick you in the shins and decide to give the kid a fatal piledriver, you're in trouble. If someone's trying to knife-murder you and give them a fatal piledriver you might be okay.",
"If you keep going after its evident you aren't in danger anymore or unnecessary force. \n\nIf someone is pushing you and you punch them, it's all good, if you punch them and they go down and they can't stand up straight like they'd have birds and bells floating around their head if they were in a Loony Tunes cartoon and you keep waling on them, then no good. If someone starts pushing you and you shoot them, no good. ",
"In America you are allowed to use reasonable force to defend yourself. Two main points:\n\n1) Reasonable force: this standard accounts for several factors that may be considered by the police, DA, and jury. Factors such as relative size difference, martial skill ability, environmental factors, weapons, intent of the attacker, and number of assailants.\n\nOne person of relatively the same same size punching you cause you insulted his girlfriend? Yeah can't pull a knife of him. Five unarmed people chasing you? Knife is more reasonable. \n\n2) defending yourself: The moment it is determined that you are no longer in danger, you cannot continue to fight regardless of past events. Let's say someone road rages on you and hits you with a baseball bat them smashes your car windows. You can pull a gun on them but if they drop their weapon and put their hands up, you cannot shoot them. \n\n",
"Shit im in florida all you gotta say before you shoot is \" he's commin right for me\" and you are good to go",
"Defence is the goal of not getting hurt (or making sure someone you are responsible for isn't hurt). This is different from offence were the goal is to hurt someone. Defence is legal. Offence is illegal. \n\n\nIf someone tries to hurt you, you are allowed to do things to not get hurt. You can run away. You can act tough and scary so they don't want to hurt you anymore. You can push someone away. You can even hurt them so they stop trying to hurt you. \n\n\nOnce they stop trying to hurt you, or can't hurt you anymore, you are now safe and this means if you keep hurting them, you are no longer doing it to not be hurt. You are hurting them just to hurt them. This has become offence and is illegal. \n\n\nWhen you need to hurt someone else to stop them from hurting you, it is important to hurt them enough to stop them from hurtng you. But only hurt them as much as they were trying to hurt you. If someone punches you, you cannot shoot them with a gun because that could kill them and punching you wasn't going to kill you. If someone tries to shoot you, you are allowed to shoot them first so they can't kill you because you being alive is more important than someone trying to kill you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/dec/14/jail-brothers-burglar-cricket-bat"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1pk6da | how does lowering taxes reduce the deficit? | I've heard from a lot of people that it's a way to reduce the deficit, but I'm not grasping the mechanism fully. To be clear, I am not disputing that it's a viable method, I'm just trying to understand how it works.
What I've heard so far is that lowering taxes means that people have more money, and spending thus goes up. That makes sense. What I don't get is, like... if taxes decrease by 1%, and spending goes up by 1%, how does that turn into a net gain for the government? Doesn't only a portion of that spending increase turn into government revenue? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pk6da/eli5_how_does_lowering_taxes_reduce_the_deficit/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd34mfz",
"cd34vbn",
"cd35w31",
"cd3d0ce"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Directly, lowering taxes increases the deficit.\n\nSome people argue that if taxes are lowered, the economy will grow and thus the Government will have greater tax revenue despite lower tax rates. This may be true, or they may just be saying it because they want to pay less taxes and don't care about anything else.",
"Well, in economics this effect is described in the Laffer curve.\n\nThe curve will show that after a certain inflection point, raising the tax rate will actually decrease tax revenues. This is because a high marginal tax rate will decrease incentives to work (and reducing GDP growth), while increasing the incentive for tax-dodging (legal or otherwise). \n\nThe shape of the Laffer curve is extremely difficult to measure though, like many economic models. My guess is that the inflection point where revenues start to go down is closer to 70%-85% marginal tax rate than our current U.S. income tax levels (39.6% max in 2013, only on income above $400K). \n\nThus, my personal opinion is that when conservatives argue that a cut of a few percentage points between the range of 30%-40% marginal tax rate will increase revenues and decrease a deficit, they're either mistaken or manipulative.\n\nEDIT: TL;DR - at the current range of tax rates, it doesn't.",
"As other posters have mentioned, the idea is that having more money on hand will drive economic growth (GDP) because the basic formula is:\n\nGDP = Consumer Spending + Government Spending + Business Investment + Net Exports\n\nConsumer spending has a multiplier effect, in which each dollar spent has a greater-than-one effect elsewhere in the economy. The idea is that when people spend money, it creates jobs, which broadens the tax base (the number of people who pay taxes), which in turn increases overall tax revenues, even if marginal rates are lowered.\n\nBut it's not that simple.\n\n1) Having a lot of cash on on hand is only useful if there is consumer confidence that there is actual economic growth and decreasing unemployment. Otherwise it tends to get saved for a rainy day. An excessively high savings rate is associated with poor consumer spending, so lowering taxes is not necessarily sufficient to drive economic growth.\n\nIn fact, lowering taxes so much that government revenues decrease can hamper the government's ability to invest in the economy (infrastructure, government jobs, public services). So if the government doesn't collect enough to make investments in a poor consumer spending environment, GDP in theory suffers even more and the government has to borrow even more.\n\n2) The \"lowered taxes\" argument is typically put in context of lowering the top marginal tax rates, business tax, and capital gains taxes. The idea is that this helps businesses and top wealth-holders spend more money to create jobs and develop the middle class, etc. etc. etc. While there is *very maybe* some evidence for this, the reality is that most of the extra cash for businesses will be carried forward for investment or paid out as dividends to shareholders, rather than employing more people. And the ultra wealthy typically don't spend disproportionately more money than one might assume. That money is typically invested at a (very) low capital gains rate, where it has little benefit to boosting government revenues.",
"At various times and places, particular individuals have argued that existing tax rates are so high that the government could collect more tax revenues if it lowered those tax rates, because the changed incentives would lead to more economic activity, resulting in more tax revenues out of rising income, even though tax rates were lowered. This is clearly a testable hypothesis that people might argue for or against on either empirical or analytical grounds. But that is seldom what happens. \n\nWhile arguments for cuts in high tax rates have often been made by free-market economists, the same arguments have been made by people who weren't, such as John Keyes, Woodrow Wilson, and JFK. But the claim \"tax cuts for the rich\" are based on a \"trickle-down theory\" also has a long pedigree. FDR's speech writer referred to \"the philosophy that had prevailed in Washington since 1921, that the object of government was to provide prosperity for those who lived and worked at the top of the economic pyramid in the belief that prosperity would trickle down to the bottom of the heap as benefit all.\" The same theme was repeated in the election campaign of 2008 when Obama attacked what he called \"the economic philosophy\" which \"says we should give more and more to those with the most hope and prosperity trickles down to everyone else.\"\n\nWhat FDR's writer was referring to that had been happening since \"1921\", was the tax rate deductions of Secretary of Treasury Andrew Mellon. Mellon pointed out that user the high income tax rates at the end of the Woodrow Wilson administration in 1921, vast sums of money had been out into tax shelters such as tax-exempt municipal bonds, instead of being invested in the private economy, where this money would create more output, income, and jobs. This was an argument that would be made at various times over the years by others. and repeatedly evaded by attacks of a \"trickle-down\" theory only found in the rhetoric of the opponents. \n\nWhat actually followed the tax rates in the 1920's were rising output, rising employment to produce output, rising incomes as a result of rising tax revenues for the government because of the rising incomes, even though tax rates had been lowered. Another consequence was that people in higher income brackets not only paid a larger amount of taxes, but a higher percentage of all taxes, after what have been called \"tax cuts for the rich.\" There were similar results in later years after high tax rates that were cut during the JFK, Reagan, and Bush years. After the 1920's tax cuts, it was not simply investors' incomes rose that this was now taxable income, since the lower tax rates made it profitable for investors to get higher returns by investing outside of tax shelters. \n\nTL;DR : Lowering taxes creates an atmosphere where rich people bring their money back into the economy from having it in offshore accounts because of ridiculously high taxes. More money in economy from lowered taxes = more money able to be taxed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
62m8zb | when a mathematician or physicist is working out a huge equation on a blackboard, what are they actually doing? | We've all seen it in films, like Good Will Hunting, where mathematicians have this big mob of numbers and letters and Greek symbols up on a blackboard. And then some young genius comes in and erases one thing and adds in a few numbers, and there it is, solved, and the people are dumbfounded.
I've done a bit of maths at school and college, so sort of understand how they like to simplify things to make the equation shorter and more elegant, but I've never really understood why these problems go unsolved for so long, especially when we have calculators, let alone super computers.
To be able to understand this fully, I'd probably have to be at the level these mathematicians are at themselves, so is there a way of explaining to me, maybe in everyday metaphors, what it is a mathematician is doing with such a huge equation and what it is that lets geniuses such as Einstein, Oppenheimer, and John Nash, stand out.
The closest thing I can think of is those puzzles where you have to work out, for example, who drives which car from such clues as "Marie drives an older car than Roger. Roger's car is not the same colour as Trevor's. Prateek's car is a convertible, unlike his wife Marie's." etc. I've spent ages working on those. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/62m8zb/eli5_when_a_mathematician_or_physicist_is_working/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfogz75",
"dfnz9q1"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They're trying different ways of making sense of the problem they're thinking of. There are two sorts of blackboard doodles, first is actual doodling where you're genuinely trying out different things and seeing what sticks.\n\nThen there's much more formal doodling where you know exactly what you need to do, and you work extra hard to make sure your doodling is only including relevant parts and that it looks \"aesthetically pleasing\" and overall nice.\n\nIf you're attacking open problem, you're probably doing the actual doodling thing. So you're writing your train of thought as you try different attacks on the problem. On the other hand, if you know the solution, then you can just write the most elegant phrasing of your solution that you can think of.\n\nWhat they are doing is basically just tracing their train of thought. Pretty much all of what you see on blackboards could be written out in Simple English and it would still be valid math, but it would take 10 blackboards whereas with abbreviations and shortcuts(like using greek letters) it can be fitted in only one half of one blackboard.\n\nIt's always \"This is what I'm talking about\", then \"But hey, you can deduce this using this and that, so we get this one\", and so on. For longer proofs it would simply become tedious to type them out like that, but it's really just long chains of simple logic piled on top each other, and there is certain established notation that allows communicating these trains of thoughts without wasting too much space. Like arrows representing \"from this into that\"(there are different kinds of arrows for very particular flavors of \"from this into that\", too). There are greek alphabet first letters that are used for angles. Capital greek pi is used to denote shorthand for multiplying bunch of numbers together, while capital sigma is used to denote adding up bunch of numbers together. Integral symbol has very particular meaning derived from calculating area under slope, etc. Lots of symbols to denote lots of things that are commonly done because that saves space and makes communicating ideas faster and easier.\n\nOne of the simplest-to-explain unsolved questions in math that has received some serious attention from top minds on the field goes as follows:\n\n1. Choose a positive integer\n2. If your integer is 1, terminate, you're done\n3. If your integer is odd, multiply it by 3 and add 1.\n4. If your integer is even, divide it by 2.\n5. Go back to 2.\n\nSo if I chose number 4, then I'd go to instruction 4, divide it by 2, get result of 2, then loop back to instruction 2, then go back to instruction 4, divide it by 2 to get result of 2, loop back and now I would terminate.\n\nAnd the open question is this: Does this loop always terminate no matter which number you choose at the beginning?\n\nYou can't plug problem like that to a calculator. In fact, mathematicians are pretty much unable to decide what possibly could be done to that sorta problem that leads us closer to the solution. Out of curiosity, some people have used supercomputers to check all the positive integers smaller than 100,000,000,000,000,000,000, and they've all terminated.",
"To solve an equation the limiting factor is not necessarily computational power, its more a question of the algorithms used. Generally speaking, a computer is \"dumb\" and can, for the most part, only solve equations, for which the solution has already been worked out (by humans).\n\nThe same is true for humans. Maybe somene is thinking wrong, or stuck on something. To come up with something is indefinitly harder than to evaluate if the solution is true. Thats why it often takes geniuses to advance."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1t3eya | if lemon juice has such a low ph of 2.3, why doesn't it burn us? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1t3eya/eli5_if_lemon_juice_has_such_a_low_ph_of_23_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce3wxpl"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"It's not strong enough to significantly damage our skin, which is reasonably resistant to weaker acids. 2.3 sounds fairly low if you just take a quick glance at the scale, but it's not really that powerful of an acid. \n\nAlso, only a relatively small portion of lemon juice is citric acid, most of it is water. That being said, put some in an open cut or in your eyes, and you'll feel it burn. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1jpnor | how did they lift off the moon with such a small rocket? | The moon has they say one sixth the gravity of the earth, the Saturn V rocket was almost 36 stories high to lift off the earth it follows then that the the Apollo 11 lander would have to be at least close to 6 stories high to leave the moon but it was not how come? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1jpnor/eli5_how_did_they_lift_off_the_moon_with_such_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbh1fks",
"cbh1kaq",
"cbh38dg"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The Apollo 11 lander was only a fraction of the weight of the entire rocket that took off from Florida. Combine that with the diminished gravity, add in a few thousand slide-rule calculations, and you've got it.\n",
"The majority of the fuel that needed to be used was for escaping the Earth's gravitational field. The rocket didn't actually need to be 36 stories to go into space, but it needed around that much fuel to reach the moon. Because on the return trip, Earth's gravity actually accelerated them towards the Earth, They did not need this massive amount of fuel to return and therefore the rocket was much smaller.",
"Another factor that hasn't been mentioned so far, is atmosphere. The earth has an atmosphere, the moon doesn't. To get into low earth orbit, a rocket has to reach approximately 17,000 mph (7km/s). The presence of air means that the rocket has to overcome massive air drag to reach that speed. A lot of fuel goes into overcoming this factor.\n\nThe moon, on the other hand, has an orbital velocity of approx. 2200 mph (1km/s), and no air drag to contend with."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3ddnc8 | what happens to your apartment, car, and debts when you go to prison for < 1 year in the us? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ddnc8/eli5what_happens_to_your_apartment_car_and_debts/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct43wzt",
"ct443co",
"ct456y0",
"ct45od1",
"ct466f0",
"ct46cve",
"ct46ekv",
"ct48jz7",
"ct4982m"
],
"score": [
12,
153,
93,
31,
3,
2,
7,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"I've known two people so far to go to jail for one or two nights and then lose their job because they weren't able to go to work.",
"Yes, you lose everything, this is part of the punishment.\n\nLet it be noted right now that the system is corrupt. You commit a crime, you are immediately placed in jail (guilty until proven innocent) - it's expensive to make calls and totally dependant upon outside people to pay for the calls. It's very easy to get trapped in jail.\n\nWhile in jail, most systems require you to pay daily for the privilege of eating and sleeping there.\n\nSome jails will hook you up with a homeless organization upon release - that's the most readjustment to life you can expect when leaving long term jail, as many just release you to the world.\n\nThis is why there is a high rate of return offenders after long term sentences, jail becomes the only life you know, and the outside world is impenetrable based on your accrued debt and lack of resources.\n\nI met a guy who did 9 years for a non-violent crime. He summed it up best:\n\n\"When I went to prison, we used pagers, when I got out, we had iphone 4's. I'd stand in line at the restaurant waiting for my tray of food, couldn't stand people bumping into me in stores, and having more than one option for toothpaste really fucked with my mind.\"\n\nMy personal experience was a very short month long stay, so I lost employment but didn't lose my life skills. I paid $23 a day to stay in county jail.",
"Bills don't stop coming in when you're in jail. If you don't pay rent/mortgage you lose your home. If you don't pay car payment you lose your car. If you don't show up to work you lose your job.",
"Depending on your job and the jail, you can get in a work release or \"bread and butter\" program where you can still go to work, but this is heavily dependant on the jail, the crime, the judge, etc...\n\nJails like this, as the jail takes a cut of your paycheck (mine was like 30% which is a lot when you make barely above minimum wage at the time). If you have your loans on auto pay, you might be able to continue paying... but you can't just park your car there... Someone needs to pick you up, drop you off, if your schedule changes, it's a huge pain in the ass, etc...\n\nAs others said, it's practically set up for you to fail. ",
"I'd love a solid answer to this question. My deceased brother's previous gf still has his stuff that she won't give back. She's going to jail for something unrelated and I'm worried about what's going to happen to the things she hasn't sold yet.",
"Answer: The bills keep coming. If neither you nor anybody on your behalf pays your rent, your landlord moves for eviction. If neither you nor anybody on your behalf pays your car note, the bank moves for a repossession.",
"There is certainly a viscous cycle. Like everything else intelligent planning can handle it though. If you know you are going to jail you could give up your apartment and move your things into a cheap storage locker. You could get rid of your car, and get an extension on your student loan payments (though odds are if you have a student loan you are statistically far less likely to be going to jail). \n\nThe good side of all this is that your creditors will likely simply want to cut their losses instead of chasing after you, and worst case you can go bankrupt while in jail and come out with a clean slate.\n\nLike everything else having some emergency savings is going to be a literal life savor when there are bumps in the road.\n\nAs to your job, depending on what you did, your employer might be happy to have you back when you get out. Most employers deal with long term leave regularly (maternity etc.) and if you are liked and they don't consider your crime serious (though a jail sentence longer than say a month generally means something serious), you could well still have a job on getting out.\n\nAnd your other option is to take job training while in jail and come out firing off resumes.\n\nThe thing about all of the above is that it takes a degree of planning , organization, and investment of effort for a long term reward, that a lot of prisoners don't have.\n\nSo yes for the most part you are hosed, but you don't necessarily have to be. Personally I think the bigger problem is the number of employers who require criminal background checks for jobs that don't require them. To my mind that is how we really screw ex-cons upon release.",
"Sadly, you would be unemployed, homeless unless you have a place to stay, with a felony record have trouble finding place to work, and most likely your credit score would of tanked from not paying things. But hey, you can always get arrested again and help the privatized prisons. Our system is designed to keep those prisons that are privately owned a float and not on rehabilitation",
"I've been in this exact situation. I spent almost 7 months in jail. My vehicle was repossessed my house foreclosed on. I lost my job. All my money I had at the time was in on hand cash which was seized at the time of arrest. I had no saving and was released at 2am on a Sunday night with no car no phone no money and only the shorts and t-shirt I was wearing when arrested. Granted I was arrested on a 90 degree day in June and released on a 24 degree night in January. At the time of release my family and everyone and everything I knew was at the closest 150 miles away. I literally had to walk to the nearest gas station where the attendant was nice enough to let me use her cell phone to call family and let me sit inside where it was warm and wait on my brother to come get me. That was almost 5 years ago. As it stands today I have a job and am a normal productive member of society with savings and my own home again but my credit has still not fully recovered from the damage my short stay in jail caused to it. But as the state here views it, had you not been doing a crime that resulted in your arrest then the problem wouldn't have arisen in the first place and is this the direct fault of the criminal and not the responsibility of the state. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
15yj4l | why most animals evolved to have 4 limbs, 2 eyes, 1 nose, etc... | I guess what I'm really asking is why there isn't more variation across the species in regards to the question in the title. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15yj4l/eli5_why_most_animals_evolved_to_have_4_limbs_2/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7qzl4j",
"c7qzudz"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"Those types of animals evolved from common ancestors, and fit their niches. However, not all animals (snakes, fish, etc) are like that. Its a matter of the common ancestor being (relatively) recent enough.",
"Having only two limbs is not very advantageous - it's very difficult to balance on two legs without arms to swing around to counter-balance. Four-legged running, on the other hand, is very stable and efficient.\n\nTwo eyes gives an advantage over one eye, because you get binocular vision, depth perception, and such. Having a third eye would not give that much more advantage compared to the amount of extra brain space and power it would take to process the information and combine it with the other two eyes.\n\nI can't really think how a second nose would be advantageous at all.\n\nOf course, none of that really explains why there's the exact configuration we see in most animals where the eyes are right above the nose, above the mouth, all on a head that's above the limbs, etc. That can probably be explained mostly by a common ancestor. The first animals to evolve those features happened to have that configuration, and they were successful enough to have the most descendants and win out over less fit species."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3euwds | how does the technology that allows us to see planets that are hundreds of millions of light years away (in super fine detail) work? how were we even able to detect the newly discovered planet that is similar to earth? | I mean, it's obviously not just a big lens. How much of what we are shown is extrapolation vs actual photographs? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3euwds/eli5_how_does_the_technology_that_allows_us_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctimqri",
"ctivs13"
],
"score": [
14,
3
],
"text": [
"It sounds like you're talking about the [Kepler space telescope](_URL_0_), and the recent announcement of newly discovered planets it's found. \n\nFirstly, if they could detect planets hundreds of millions of light-years away, that'd be amazing! It's amazing enough what Kepler can do, though. The planets it's found have mostly been from tens to several hundreds of light years away. It doesn't actually see the planets directly, actually - what it does is it sits there and looks at a collection of stars and very carefully monitors the amount of light coming from each one. If a planet passes between us and the star, that star's light will dim a tiny bit. If Kepler sees a star that has dimming that happens on a regular schedule (say, every 200 days), that tells scientists that there's a planet orbiting that star with an orbital period of 200 days. \nKepler isn't actually a very powerful telescope at all, as far as raw detail, because it's not made to \"zoom in\" - it's made to watch several thousand stars and keep track of the amount of light coming from each one. It's an unusual sort of telescope in that way. Everything learned is based on extrapolation, like you said - for example, by looking at the temperature of the star and the length of time it takes the planet to complete an orbit, they can determine exactly how hot the surface is.\n\nIn most cases, once Kepler has found a candidate (that is, it looks like there's a periodic and predictable dimming of a star), other telescopes will be focused on it at the right time to try and get more precise information. Like a lot of science, many different groups of people collaborate to share information collected with different instruments. \n\nIn some cases, it's possible for other telescopes to take spectrographic measurements of the light coming from the star, watch how it changes during a transit (the planet passing in front of it) and actually determine things about that planet's atmosphere! That's not what Kepler's particular mission is, though, and this is usually only possible with very large planets that are relatively close to their parent stars (and not too far from us).\n",
"In addition to /u/EffingTheIneffable's explanation, I'll note that we can't really \"see\" the new Kepler planet at all. We know of it's existence through data analysis. The picture that's been showing up in newspapers is an artist's representation of what it might look like. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler_%28spacecraft%29"
],
[]
] |
|
bgb2y6 | why do some online games lag so much to the point where they’re unplayable even though you’re getting high download speeds from the isp? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bgb2y6/eli5_why_do_some_online_games_lag_so_much_to_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"eljnnws",
"elju9sr"
],
"score": [
3,
6
],
"text": [
"Could be server lag. If the game servers are in a different country you can still get high ping. also upload speeds are very important as your data would not be getting sent to the server within the time limit.",
"There's a difference between latency and bandwidth. \nBandwidth is your overall download speed. \nLatency is how long it takes for any information to cross over. \n \nYou can have good bandwidth and bad latency (EG, sending a crate of hardrives by overnight shipping) \nYou can have good latency and bad bandwidth (EG directly connected by an old school phone line) \n \nThere are a number of factors that might be affecting the latency. \n1) It might not be your ISP at all, the server for you online game might be busy, and the latency is you waiting for the server to get to your computer. \n2) The server might be far away, it takes time for your ISP to figure out how to send your stuff to the server's ISP in another country, then for everything in between to make arrangements for your stuff to get sent, then repeat for the reply. \n3) Your ISP or someone in between you and the server might be losing some of the stuff you are sending. You thus have to waste time resending stuff. \n4) Your ISP or someone in between you and the server might also be really busy, you have to wait in line for your stuff to get sent."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5mrtfo | what's the difference between brown sugar and "normal" sugar? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5mrtfo/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_brown_sugar_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"dc5tpdq",
"dc5u4of",
"dc5vikr"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
15
],
"text": [
"There is more molasses in brown sugar.\n\nWhite sugar is very highly refined, almost pure sucrose (^C 12 ^H 22 ^O 11).",
"Not all white sugar is refined. All white cane sugar is refined but if the packet doesn't say cane sugar it's probably from sugar beets and therefore naturally white. ",
"Brown sugar is actually white sugar, however they add in about 2% unrefined molasses for colour and flavour.\n\n 'Organic' sugar does not receive milk of lime in the refining process (the step before the product is turned into white sugar), which leaves in brown in colour too, making it slightly more healthy (according to the tour guide).\n\nSOURCE: Durban sugar tour"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
352qxe | why do public schools require teachers to be certified, but private schools do not? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/352qxe/eli5_why_do_public_schools_require_teachers_to_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr0dylf",
"cr0eegc"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Every private school that I know of requires you to be certified. In fact every one that I know of holds a higher standard for being hired (often requiring a Master's Degree, more experience, etc) so what you have experienced may not be the norm for private schools. \n\nThe reason for this is that Private schools are not in direct control of the State the way that Public schools are. They have a lot more freedom to do what they want and use the fact that they pay more to attract the better teachers that they then weed through like any other job applicant to pick who they want. ",
"Some private schools do.\n\nThe entire point of a private school is that it's not bound by public school regulations and they're able to make their own decisions about educational standards and policies. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
f8571s | how can so many types of tissues in our body arise from a single cell? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f8571s/eli5_how_can_so_many_types_of_tissues_in_our_body/ | {
"a_id": [
"fijbl8q",
"fijcs0y"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Basically this cell has a lot of indtructions how to do different stuff but in the beginning it just use the indtruction multiply and orient yourself. After a certain smout of cells is reached they specialize and start reading the instructions for the place and orientation they are in. Then they build specialized tools from these instructions to beeing able to do the task their place needs. Its kinda a one use transformation, they cannoz change their task (just in rare cases) and if they multiply the daughter cells will just continue the task of the motger cell",
"So, real quick, tissue is just a bunch of cells working together to do a specific job. They are specialized cells. \n\nNow, everyone here has started out as one cell. Eventually, over time, that one cell divided again and again and again. Until there is a bunch of cells. During that time, they decide, \"you know what guys, this is gonna be a big organism, so to make sure everything runs smoothly, we are gonna have divide up to do different jobs. \" So they do, which is when the cells specialize in a job. Some cells focus on being heart cells, others work at being an brain, and so on and so forth. \n\nAnother bit of information that you might not be looking for is that each cell have DNA, and in that DNA they have the tools (genes) to perform every function for every type of specialized cell. But, cells can permanently turn off those tools so they don't end up making the wrong proteins in the wrong place."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3ncaxi | why there are serious rainstorms on the east coast if hurricane joaquin is diverting way off into the atlantic? | My SO said there was something about rain bands, but it didn't make much sense to me. Hoping there's some clarification. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ncaxi/eli5_why_there_are_serious_rainstorms_on_the_east/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvmsogg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The rain that's coming in is completely unrelated to the hurricane. It was just a regular ole nor'easter. What made Sandy so huge and devastating was that it was a hurricane (tropical storm at landfall) at the center of a nor'easter. Imagine if this nor'easter merged with Joaquin with 125 mph winds?! It could have been another devastating storm. Thank goodness they didn't merge."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1v7e0z | what is stopping the us govt from implementing a universal healthcare or expanding medicare to everyone except financial shortcoming ? can't they lower the medicare age by 5 years annually such that they can cover everyone in few years ? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v7e0z/eli5_what_is_stopping_the_us_govt_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"cepexyt"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The US govt is not a single entity, it is made up of individuals, many of who oppose universal healthcare (primarily Republicans). Ideally, both sides would work together and come up with a compromise that gives both sides something they want. I frequently see claims that universal healthcare would actually lower costs, so maybe you could throw in lowering taxes at the same time to win over Republican support."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1b9o9r | what happens to kids with autism or related disorders when they grow up. | Everyone talks about how autistic kids view the world but I can't recall hearing from autistic adults. How do they deal with everything around them? I was reading /r/bestof and this occurred to me.
Edit: if possible I would like to hear from autistic adults... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1b9o9r/eli5_what_happens_to_kids_with_autism_or_related/ | {
"a_id": [
"c94vmf7",
"c94whij",
"c94wm23",
"c94wsl1",
"c94yvfg",
"c953pf0",
"c954xy4",
"c95ga2v"
],
"score": [
8,
7,
3,
3,
6,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They become adults with autism or related disorders. How they deal with everything around them varies; some *can't* deal with everything around them.",
"My brother is high functioning and an adult. He has a very set routine and doesn't like it when it is disrupted. He enjoys his alone time. He prefers single-player video games to multiplayer, since he has a hard time predicting other people. He loves analyzing anything and everything, which probably led him to study computer science. He is one of the most rational people I know, even if the way he thinks baffles me more often than not. He loves talking about anything that interests himalthough conversations tend to be one-sided. \n\nHe has done an excellent job of learning social interactions consciously. It took years of trial and error. Now you wouldn't know he is slightly autistic until you spent a good deal of time with him. ",
"Hope you don't mind that all I have to go on is the experiences of me (17 y/o autistic), my dad (50-something suspected autistic) and several friends. My dad is currently living in a homeless shelter in Texas, mostly by choice, but also because he can't afford child support. He's been a chef, truck driver, and a restaurant manager. He's had two wives, and as far as I know, two children. He has no contact with his siblings. The only reason my mom left him was because when he was a truck driver, he was never around. When something happens that he can't handle, he goes backpacking/hitchhiking for months. Recently got back into contact with him by phone. Me, I am planning on studying law, so that if an acting career doesn't work out, I can attempt to start a disability advocacy practice. My ex (also autistic) has been planning to be a doctor since she was 4. She's excited about a conference on medicine she's been invited to. TL;DR: Mileage will vary.",
"My son has Aspergers and is 24. He just got a driver's license a year ago and is taking a few classes at a local community college. He is on disability. He still lives at home but is pretty well adjusted and now even has a girlfriend! He is about 7 years behind emotionally and maturity.",
"The reason you're having a hard time getting a fixed answer is that there really isn't one .... autism is, by definition, a spectrum disorder, so the strengths, difficulties, challenges, and severity of one person usually don't look anything like the next person. I have worked with people with autism who, as teenagers, were non-verbal, not able to complete ADLs (activities of daily living, such as feeding themselves, using the toilet, etc) without help, and engaged in aggressive and/or self injurious behavior. I have also known teens who are straight A students, have all kinds of hobbies and interests, and only need some help learning social skills. As you can imagine, the adult outcomes for these two different scenarios are VERY different. \n\nI highly suggest trying to track down this documentary if you are interested in the subject. If follows several individuals as they transition into adult life, and shows the different levels of supports and services that they need to live as independently as possible. \n\n_URL_0_\n\nHope this helps some!",
"I have Aspergers. I'm 21, fairly normal, people only figure it out if I tell them or they have formal training\n\nI come across as antisocial at points\n\nMed free",
"My cousin who is now 24, has somewhat severe/mild autism. He can still communicate with people, doesn't need assistance to do basic things like eat, sleep, use the bathroom, etc. However he isn't able to drive, can't really be left alone for a long period of time or anything. Well now that he is 24, he switches off between living with my aunt, and living in what is called a group home. A group home is kind of like a dorm room for people with mental disabilities. He lives there during the weekdays, and is usually home every other weekend and on holidays. At the group home, there is probably around 50 people ranging from age 18 to 30 to live there. They are taken care of by the service people who work there. Depending on how severe their autism is, they may actually permanently live there. Luckily, my cousin is able to function quite normally and is ok to come home like I mentioned before. He really enjoys video games, pokemon, wrestling, and music. I can have a fairly normal conversation with him, but it's usually pretty one sided. He can sometimes get really frustrated because if he has a problem, he has all this anger and emotion built up but really doesn't have to mental function to deal with it in a healthy manner. This used to happen quite often when he was younger but as he's gotten older they don't happen as much. ",
"Depends on what they have and how bad it is. Some are able to live fairly normal lives with jobs. Others live at home and are cared by family. Others live in group homes or mental instutions. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.massmutual.com/planningtools/additional-resources/special-needs/special-care/autism-coming-of-age"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
cdgzfs | how do animals, such as chameleons or some types of sea creatures, adjust their skin to blend in with their surroundings? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cdgzfs/eli5_how_do_animals_such_as_chameleons_or_some/ | {
"a_id": [
"ettszr8",
"ettt3qs",
"ettub5d"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If I remember right, there are cells that shrink or expand in reaction to various stimuli in the surroundings. These cells are filled with a type of pigment that reflects one type of light. When these cells shrink, less of that light is reflected. When they expand, more of that light is reflected.\n\nCuttlefish are able to change their color based on their surroundings but I'm not sure if anyone remembers how. I heard somewhere that they're ironically colorblind. \n\nChameleon though... they don't change colors at will, their cells change color in response to temperature. Imagine if getting goosebumps made you purple.",
"Squids and some other molluscs can control the skin cells that contain the pigments directly, so they can switch colors really fast and in fancy patterns. \n\nChameleons on the other hand change the color of their skin slower. They kind of relax or excite their whole skin at once, which can give them different hues but sadly no fancy strobe effects.",
"Just adding to already correct answers they have cells called dermatocites that allow them to change their color. There are some great YouTube and Ted talk videos out there covering this subject. They recently discovered that cuttlefish have photoreceptor cells in their skin. This explains how they can copy patterns underneath them, they literally see 360 degrees with their skin.\n\nAlso just to dispel an old myth Chameleons do have camouflage abilities but that is because their spectrum of colors are all natural earth tones. But they do not change color to match their surroundings. They change color based off mood, temperature and mating behaviors."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3ms8ey | - how does fatal concussive force actually kill you? | What happens first? Is it instant? Do you die over time? Do you perceive it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ms8ey/eli5_how_does_fatal_concussive_force_actually/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvho4xz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Assuming your brain isn't just smashed to pieces, *usually* you die of a concussion because your brain swells up too much for the space in your skull.\n\nSwelling is usually a good thing: it's your body sending more blood to the damaged area, so there is more energy and oxygen nearby to help those cells fix the damage. But your brain is stuck inside a box with not a whole lot of extra space. So a little swelling isn't bad, but if the concussion is bad enough, your brain swells *too* much and all the extra blood puts too much pressure on your brain, killing you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4lfv01 | how do frisbees fly? | Google gives a ton of mumbo jumbo. I'm sorry Google, I didn't know I needed a degree. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4lfv01/eli5_how_do_frisbees_fly/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3mzbot",
"d3mzfev",
"d3n7hj6"
],
"score": [
32,
16,
2
],
"text": [
"A frisbee has a similar shape to the wing of an airplane, so it generates lift. The spinning motion generates stability. That's basically all there is to it.",
"Ill keep this simple as I can. basically they are 3 factors. The design are ether a simple disk or doughnut shape that are thrown with a spin. \n\nThe first is the design of the frisbee are made to ether let it fall slow (disk) or to create lift (doughnut). Both are designed to be aerodynamic but each will do slightly diffrent when you spin them.\n\nThe 2nd is the spin. By spinning you make the frisbee a gyroscope. This stabilizes it into what ever angle you release it at. More spin the longer it's stabilized and straighter it can travel without falling sideways into the ground or if angled good enough you can make it turn in the air. Some doughnut frisbee act like a fan or helicopter blades and can create lift that makes arching them a lot easier than disk styles.\n\nThe 3rd is the force from the throw. This is the primary speed, lift, rotation speed, direction and distance the frisbee will travel. Because of so many factors from this one process the math can get confusing if it tries to go into too much detail.",
"Okay, I just learned about this in jet mechanic school. The front of the Frisbee is splitting the air either above it or below it. The air below exerts air pressure upward, while the air above generates air pressure downward. As it turns out, the upward pressure from the bottom is a little stronger than the downward pressure from the top, so that upward force kinda works against gravity, slowing the frisbee's drop.\n\nIf you want to know why the air on top has such a lower amount of pressure, it's explained by Bernoulli's principle. Bernoulli studied fluids and pressure or something, and he found out that, while fluids such as air constantly exert pressure outward, movement of the fluid reduces the amount of pressure it can exert. It's like it has to redirect the energy required for movement, so it takes it from all the pressure that was sitting around doing nothing. I'm not great with physics so that's about as well as I understand it.\n\nAnyway, moving fluids generate less pressure, and the faster they move, the lesser the pressure. So back to frisbees, the top air is moving faster than the bottom air. Why? Because the shape of the frisbee, kinda curved on top, requires air to move around it, while the bottom air doesn't have any such obstacle. So the top air loses some of it's pressure while moving out of the way of the frisbee's \"air foil\", as we call that shape, and that slight change in pressure causes frisbees to sort of hover in the air like that.\n\nThis same principle, Bernoulli's, explains how air planes fly. That difference in pressure is magnified 1000s of times over by the jet engine pushing it way faster than a frisbee, and eventually that upward pressure becomes stronger than the force of gravity. That's the magic of it, thanks for reading."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a85f3l | how does not buying paper save trees when it’s going to be sold either way? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a85f3l/eli5_how_does_not_buying_paper_save_trees_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"ec82zbf",
"ec83663",
"ec84y7y",
"ec8ltt2"
],
"score": [
8,
13,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Because of supply and demand. Yes there is no way to get back the trees that were turned into paper. \n\nBut if people stop buying it then the companies will not manufacture as much which would mean that theoretically less trees would be cut down. ",
"Because there's less demand. Eventually some will be unsold so the tree farms wouldn't cut as much down next time.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nThough do note nowadays pretty much all our paper comes from managed forests where the trees were specifically planted years ago for paper, nobody cuts down random bits of the forest for paper.",
"The paper that exists today would be, but the longer it takes to sell, the fewer trees that get cut down to make the next batch",
"This is not really about the paper that is already in the store. Because that paper is already a harvested tree that is transported to a mill, pulped and made into paper that is packaged and transported (probably through several transports) to the store. Just throwing *that* paper away is actually a worse idea in terms of environment impact than buying it and using it, since if you do then all of the steps would have been for nothing.\n\nNot buying paper to save the environment, though, is about statistics. Well, it begins there anyway. What happens if you don't buy as much paper as you used to do before? Well, the store will over time have a decline in sales, if enough of their customers start doing what you do.\n\nThat means that, over time, they will purchase either fewer pallets of paper. Or just as many as before, but not as often as before.\n\nWhen all the stores start doing this, it'll make a difference for the paper mill as well. They will sell less paper, so they will produce less paper. And as a result buy less timber. Which, obviously correlated, will probably not be harvested at the same pace any more.\n\nSo, yes. If you buy less paper, it'll save trees from being harvested. It will not save the trees that were used to manufacture the packet of paper that you see in front of you. And most certainly not the paper that is being manufactured as we speak. But it will, over time, make a difference. And that counts too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4jx4au | why is national rail not considered a monopoly for travel into london. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4jx4au/eli5why_is_national_rail_not_considered_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3aacuw",
"d3aagpk",
"d3aan9l",
"d3ae7uc",
"d3ak5ld",
"d3awdrs"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
6,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Not all monopolies are illegal. This may be *your* only option but people who live elsewhere have plenty of options. It also wouldn't be your only option if you owned a car. ",
"Monopoly regulation generally only applies to private companies. National Rail is run by the government, and the government generally excludes its own operations from any monopoly rules.",
"As I understand it, most trains are actually not run by National Rail but by one of many train operators - Virgin Trains, Southern etc. And in theory there could be some scope for competition - for example, from Cambridge to London you could either get a Great Northern train or an Abellio Greater Anglia train. If you choose the latter, you can get cheaper prices (it's normally a much slower service, and goes to Liverpool Street rather than King's Cross). Clearly however a lot of towns and cities don't have this option. You can find some discussion of 'competition' with UK railways here: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_).",
" > In Great Britain, National Rail is the trading name licensed for use by the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC), an unincorporated association whose membership consists of the passenger train operating companies (TOCs) of Great Britain that run the passenger services previously provided by the British Railways Boar\n[Click Here](_URL_0_)",
"I'm not familiar with the specifics of UK rail travel, but in general, rail travel falls under a category of businesses called a \"natural monopoly\".\n\nRail lines are expensive to build out and take up a lot of a limited land resources. If there were to be competing railroad companies, you would waste land building rail lines that serve the same purpose, or you would have difficulty getting new players to enter the market due to high capital costs to build the infrastructure that they couldn't risk not making money from. Even if the trainsets themselves are owned and run by different companies, you still need a centralized controller to operate the overall rail network to make sure trains don't collide and to handle switching, similar to an air traffic controller. \n\nElectricity and water utilities, as well as telephone and Internet also fall under the category of a natural monopoly.",
"I'd like to point out that, if National Rail is actually government-owned, well, the government's the one that makes the laws. The UK Government could literally just pass a statute that says \"National Rail doesn't count as a monopoly because we say so.\"\n\nI don't know if that's the case, but it's a possibility."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/mar/08/competition-regulator-backs-scrapping-of-rail-franchises"
],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rail"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
1u0grx | do bounty hunters actually have any real authority about a regular civilian ? | They seem to be overstepping their rights
edit: if anyone was wondering, this [gem](_URL_0_) from r/cringe is what sparked my interest | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1u0grx/eli5_do_bounty_hunters_actually_have_any_real/ | {
"a_id": [
"cedb4jb",
"cedbjcm",
"cedd7ev",
"cedg7l4",
"cedh2qs",
"cf1fsyd"
],
"score": [
7,
149,
11,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It varies by state.\n\n_URL_0_.\n\nIn states that have no special licensing or regulations, they are acting as citizens. The arrest is a citizen's arrest and they have no legal protection against being hurt by the suspect. In some states it's completely banned.\n\nHopefully a lawyer will be able to answer better.",
"State laws vary greatly, some don't allow bounty hunters to make any arrests at all, but quite often yes, they do have even more authority than the police. The reason is that the bail jumper *gave* them that authority when they signed the bail agreement. They are essentially signing away their rights and agreeing to such terms. Bounty hunters don't have to read a fugitive his rights either. If he's on bail, that's already been done and the bounty hunter is just returning him to the custody of the state. Someone on bail technically remains in the custody of the state, but with certain agreed to freedoms provided they behave.\n\nBounty hunters only have authority over someone who skips bail. They have no such authority to track down people wanted by the police for other reasons. Again, the fugitive must have consented to this arrangement beforehand.\n\nBounty hunters can also enter a fugitive's home without either notice or a warrant. But they have no right to enter the home of a friend or relative, or any other private property, even if they believe the fugitive is inside. In that case they'll just stake the place out and call the police to make the arrest.",
"In extension to this question, rather than make a new post, how do bounty hunters make money? Not really familiar with bail or how it works",
"So from the other comments, since the hunters do not have authority over people other than bail jumpers, a family could technically make a protective ring around a bail jumper and escort them. \n\nIf the bounty hunter tries to forcibly remove the bail jumper from the family circle and causes any harm, the bounty hunter is now legally liable and can be arrested for assault at a later time. \n\nCorrect? ",
"What were they shooting the suspect with in this video? Paintball guns?",
"Before reading /u/Pandromeda 's comment, I thought the video was a couple of lonely single moms attacking people and covering them in lipstick. Yes I realize how late I am."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEh3Q9ARMKE"
] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounty_hunter#Laws_in_the_U.S"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3g1wgo | why is veterans day (usa) on a wednesday? | After some research, the Uniform Monday Holiday Act in 1968 moved George Washington's Birthday, Memorial Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, and Veterans Day from their traditional days to a Monday, making all of them convenient 3 day weekends. But, in 1978 Veterans Day was switched back to being on November 11, and I can't find any reason why other than people wanted it on Nov 11.
I don't suppose anyone alive in the 70s could explain what people had against 3 day weekends? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3g1wgo/eli5_why_is_veterans_day_usa_on_a_wednesday/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctu210y",
"ctu21ax"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Veterans Day is set for November 11th because that's the date that pretty much all countries have for it. It's the anniversary of the end of the First World War -- it's not an arbitrary date.",
"Because Nov 11 is also the day ww1 ended.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.va.gov/opa/vetsday/vetdayhistory.asp"
]
] |
|
rp2zs | - why i'm connected to a billion torrent seeders, only 5 will *actually* connect, and i still only get 30kbps sometimes... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/rp2zs/eli5_why_im_connected_to_a_billion_torrent/ | {
"a_id": [
"c47hx83",
"c47jkl5"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"\"Connected\" means that you're aware of the existence of those seeders, but not that they are transmitting data to you. The seeders might be \"busy\" uploading to other users at full capacity, and have no spare bandwidth to send to you.\n\nMany bittorrent clients also try to keep track of \"reputation\" of peers, and if you're a new to a torrent, they may only tentatively upload a little bit to you, and then wait and observe whether you then re-share that data to other peers. These clients will upload in preference to people who share well, as opposed to those who don't share much.",
"In addition to what Nebu wrote, if both you and the seeder are using NAT without port forwarding, then there is no way for a direct connection to be made between you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
8ab237 | why is most of world's deepest mines located in south africa? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ab237/eli5_why_is_most_of_worlds_deepest_mines_located/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwxaza4"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"This country is blessed with significant deposits of gold and diamonds -- materials so valuable that it's worth digging very deep to extract them.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
f47u66 | why does adding butter make food taste so much better? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f47u66/eli5_why_does_adding_butter_make_food_taste_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"fhombro",
"fhooj2l",
"fhoq47z"
],
"score": [
20,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It's fat. Our minds are predisposed to seek out fat. Until modern times, fat was a vital part of survival because of its energy density and it was hard to get, so our taste buds and the part of our brain that processes food flavor evolved to reward ourselves with endorphins when we eat fat which make us feel good. In modern times we have easy access to fat, and frankly we get too much of it, but it takes a long time for our bodies to evolve so we still get pleasure from eating fat.",
"The fat in it. Fat is more energy dense and burns longer. It stores vitamins and warms your body. Fat is magical. Then came sugar and spice and everything diabetic... Butter is the premise for High Fat Low Carb diets. (Sugar is a carb.)\n\nThere is a LOT to unload here when it comes to nutritional biochem, but basically it's really good for you if you have less sugar/carbs.\n\nOne comment on salt. Salt is used often to bring taste out. You can use it in combination with spices, on meat, and on fats (butter).",
"Most aromas / flavors are lipophilic, i.e. soluble in fat. The tasty stuff is soluble in butter and more butter means more tasty stuff in your mouth / nasal cavity."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2evz5m | game theory, especially the concept of "grim trigger" | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2evz5m/eli5_game_theory_especially_the_concept_of_grim/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck3gvb1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Game Theory is a way of describing strategy and decision making in mathy terms. It's generally about finding optimal strategies or equilibrium where no one has any reason to pick a different strategy.\n\nOne of the strategies in some types of \"games\" (or a thing that has multiple people all making strategic decisions) is called the Grim Trigger. It basically says \"play nice with the other person until they betray you. Then, never forgive them ever again.\" It is not generally the best strategy, and it only gets worse if the information is imperfect."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
80a4u1 | wrinkles in clothes | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/80a4u1/eli5_wrinkles_in_clothes/ | {
"a_id": [
"duv0evv"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"When fabric cools off of a line or when you get it out of the drier, it is locked in the shape that the fibers cooled in making it wrinkled. That is why we iron our clothes when they're wrinkled, we warm them to form different bonds so as they are cooled they become unwrinkled."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5vtgon | how do good actors end up in flop movies? | The first example that comes to mind is Kevin Spacey acting in Nine Lives. He has [a number](_URL_0_) of awards and has acted in hugely successful movies and shows, but he still chose to act in a movie that he had to know would get scathing reviews. How do actors that could get roles in any movie they want end up in movies they know won't go anywhere? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vtgon/eli5_how_do_good_actors_end_up_in_flop_movies/ | {
"a_id": [
"de4pzxj",
"de4q197",
"de4qgz4",
"de4rbmq",
"de4rzrt"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
6,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"It's sometimes surprisingly hard to tell that a movie is going to be bad. Every movie involves a new set of people and ideas; very few movies are made by the same whole team that made a previous winner, as people tend to move around. So there's always a lot of risk. And with so many kinds of artists and creators having so many ideas, it can get messy.",
"I've always wondered that too. I guess I just thought maybe they were broke as shit when they got the offer to do that movie ",
"Money. When a big pay check or sometimes a smaller pay check for a smaller role or from a lower budget film (look at their inebriated IMDB and you will find they make a lot a films you have never heard of ) comes their way and they take it so they can own more crap. \nThat reason they like the smaller pay check for the lower budget film is because it's even better for them when the film sucks because then no one will remember it, the public only remember the good films anyway so it hasn't hurt their career and they can continue to make more crap that no one will see or remember or here about a week after it's released.\nNo producer or director intends to make a terrible film and therefore an actor cannot intentionally select a bad film to be in, it just happens to turn into a bad film and it is mostly out of everyone's control and so although the actor was merely paid to do a job that ended up a pile of crap he will cash his pay check and live the Hollywood lifestyle without the downsides of being associated with a terrible unmemorable film.",
"First and foremost, if the movie has the budget to hire the actor, a lot of times the actor will take it. Being in a bad movie doesn't really ruin an actor's career because nobody will see it. That said, actors don't really know which movies are going to be flops. Movie studios have a much greater interest in a movie not flopping because they are investing a lot of money into it, and yet they make mistakes quite a bit. An actor will consider the script, the director, the costars, etc... before committing, but nothing's a sure thing. Even great directors make flops some times. Take Disney, add Johnny Depp, and one of the most successful directors of all time, and you might get Pirates of the Caribbean... or you might get Lone Ranger.",
"In addition to reasons others have mentioned, actors will contract with studios for a certain number of movies. For example, they might say, \"We'll let you star in this artsy Oscar-bait movie, but in return we want you to also star in our stupid action movie.\""
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000228/awards?ref_=m_nm_awd&mode=desktop"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
rk7gy | f(x) | I really dont get this concept, can someone clear it up for me? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/rk7gy/eli5_fx/ | {
"a_id": [
"c46h85o",
"c46hscn",
"c46htyk"
],
"score": [
22,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"f(x) is a mathy way of saying \"This is a function which gives a certain answer for any value of x you use in the following equation\". In a few years, when you take algebra in school, you'll be able to understand what that sentence means, but in short, there is a lot of math you can do that's more difficult than the typical \"2 + 3 = 5\" type stuff, where rather than numbers, there are letters which represent a value that is not known. \n\nFor example, you might have \"2 + *x* = 5\", and you'd have to figure out which number to use in place of *x* to make the arithmetic correct. \n\nIt's possible to have more than one unknown value, for example, \"*x* + *y* = 5\" I won't get into why right now, but that's the same thing as \"*y* = 5 - *x*\", which can be rewritten as \"f(*x*) = 5 - *x*\".\n\nSo if you used the number '3' in place of *x*, you'd have f(3) = 5 - \n3, which is the same as f(3) = 2. For each different number you use for *x*, you get a different answer.\n\nEdit: Incorporated totally accurate correction in nimaku's reply.",
"It's just a fancy way of saying that one thing is a function of another. But what does that mean? Well, say you went to the candy store and you decided you were going to buy as many jolly ranchers as you could afford. Mmm, Jollyranchers. Okay, now say they cost 10 cents each and you have 2 dollars, or 200 cents (it's good to use the same units). The number of Jollyranchers you can buy is a *function* of how much money you have. So a fancy math person might say \"f(x) = x/10\"\n\nIf you don't know what x is, DON'T PANIC! Just think about what that nice man Jimbabwe said. \"The number of jollyranchers I can buy is a *function* of how many **cents** I have. So the let's be honest here, the answer we're looking for is an amount of jollyranchers. How many of those sweet, sweet morsels are we going home with? Well, we already know how much those cost. So x is the thing that is changing depending on how much money each customer has. Let's plug that in and see if it works. f(200) = 200/10. All I did was substitute a 200 for each x I saw. That part on the right side of the equation is our answer! 200/10 = 20. You can buy 20 jollyranchers. \n\nThat's all there is to it! It's just a fancy way of saying one thing is related to another thing. Want some homework? The distance you might drive in a car is a *function* of how fast you're going. You can express this distance in terms of f(x). How would you do that? If you're driving 80 miles per hour, how long will it take you to drive 80 miles? :)",
"If you were to say it out loud, it would be, \"a function called 'f' of a variable called 'x'\n\nIt could be g(y), in which case it would be, \"a function called 'g' of a variable called 'y'\n\nThe function part means the action part. Often times, elsewhere on the paper it tells you what that action is. The action might be, \"multiply the variable by 2\" or \"turn the variable upside down\" or change the color of the variable to green\"\n\nThe variable part is the thing being changed. In math, it is usually a number, but if you're just trying to understand what a function is, the variable could be anything. \n\nThink of it like a machine. Let's say, an oven that is set at 400 degrees. Whatever goes in the oven is going to be baked at 400 degrees. That's the function (the f) of the oven. The variable (the x) is whatever you put in the oven. Cookie dough, cake mix, a baby, a chicken, etc. Depending on what you put in, you'll get something specific out. \n\nf(x) = bake x at 400 degrees. f(y) = bake y at 400 degrees. \n\nLet's change the function. Now, instead of an oven, it's a dishwasher. We don't call it the same thing as an oven, because it doesn't do what an oven does. Whatever you put in it, it gets washed and rinsed. Dirty dishes, a baby, cookie mix, etc. Depending on what you put in, you get something specific out. \n\ng(x) = wash and rinse x. g(y) = wash and rinse y. \n\nFinally, you can do things to the functions, just as the functions do things to the variables. If f(x) = bake x at 400 degrees, and g(x) = wash and rinse x, then what if I said g(f(x))? it would be interpreted as bake x at 400 degrees, and then wash and rinse whatever came out of the oven. If I said f(g(x)), it would mean wash and rinse x, and then bake it at 400 degrees. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3i285r | why is there such a significant home advantage in sport? | Bonus question: is there as much of an advantage as it seems? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i285r/eli5_why_is_there_such_a_significant_home/ | {
"a_id": [
"cucnpe6",
"cucnths",
"cucok0v",
"cuctw82",
"cucu2p2",
"cucwkv1"
],
"score": [
3,
66,
9,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"My favorite NFL writer, Gregg Easterbrook, analyzed the NFL and found that in regular season, home teams had a significant advantage, but once they entered into you lose and you're out playoff games, the advantage evaporated. He theorized that they're then playing all out and leaving everything on the field. ",
"It's like shitting at home in your bathroom. You know where the handle is, you know where the extra TP is, you know where the plunger is in case shit gets hairy. That's called home field advantage because you are used to your surroundings: sun, wind, grass, refs, fans, noise are all familiar. As a result you shit much better.",
"The extent of the advantage depends on the sport.\n\nThe home crowd may give you extra motivation at a subconscious level, which causes you to perform better. The British F1 driver said this was worth about half a second per lap, though he was likely exaggerating. \n\n[There is also some evidence referees may be biased in favour of home teams.]( _URL_0_) Not everyone agrees, however. \n\nIn sports where variability in the pitch has an effect home advantage comes from familiarity, and being able to control the pitch to some extent. In the recent Ashes series (cricket) the home team (England) were bowling on pitches that suited their style while blunting Australia's bowling style. English pitches typically have more moisture in them than Australian ones. This moisture helps spin bowlers, but also takes the edge off the speed of a fast bowl.",
"Everyone else in this thread has great answers.\n\nI just wanted to mention that because of the rules of the game, Baseball has a major home team advantage. The visiting team bats first meaning the home team bats last. Because of this, if they're in the final inning of a game and the score is tied, the home team only needs to score one run to win. If the visiting team scores a go-ahead run, the home team still gets the bottom of that inning to try to tie or take the lead.\n\nAlso, in baseball, major league parks don't have identical dimensions. You'll hear baseball stadiums referred to as \"hitters parks\" or as \"pitchers parks\" based on various factors like the size or the weather. For example, Coors Field in Colorado where the Rockies play is a hitters park, despite being large, because the higher altitude air is thinner so batted balls go farther.\n\nSince baseball teams play half of their games at home, the front office of those teams can get players that function better in their home park.",
"In football home field is important because when your on offense the crowd is quiet allowing the players and coaches communicate better. Then when your on defense the crowd gets loud making hard for the opposition to communicate ",
"I've heard it's all about the refs. Refs do not want to be booed (like any human being)\n\nSome guys actually did a study on it: \n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.researchgate.net/publication/254417747_The_importance_of_time_in_referee_home_bias_due_to_social_pressure._Evidence_from_Spanish_football"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://freakonomics.com/2011/12/18/football-freakonomics-how-advantageous-is-home-field-advantage-and-why/"
]
] |
|
18d4gr | the implications of north koreas nuclear test? | Is there going to be anything to worry about? Are there any really impactful ramifications for them? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18d4gr/eli5_the_implications_of_north_koreas_nuclear_test/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8dr4mz",
"c8ds0no"
],
"score": [
3,
14
],
"text": [
"Unless there's been an announcement that's made the wires in the past few minutes, as I write this it's not yet known that it *was* a nuclear test.\n\nThe DPRK has claimed to have conducted three nuclear weapon tests. The first was identified by experts outside the regime as being a fizzle, a particular type of failed detonation. (Basically, you start a nuclear reaction, but fail to contain it long enough for it to complete. Most of the nuclear material remains unreacted, and the bomb produces a much smaller explosion than it was meant to.)\n\nThe second test is a weird one. It created a larger explosion than the first test, but it wasn't large enough to be a *plausible* atomic weapon built by a \"nuclear newbie,\" if you will. Couple that with the fact that *no* nuclear reaction products were detected and you have what looks for all the world like a *hoax.* If you set off a very large conventional explosion underground, the results would look *exactly* like the second test.\n\nThere is a credible argument to be made that the second purported nuclear test was in fact a completely conventional explosion set off as a face-saving measure to make up for the obvious failure of the first test. True? Nobody outside the highest echelons of the DPRK regime knows. But it's certainly plausible. Perhaps more so than to imagine that the DPRK managed to build an extremely small — meaning extremely miniaturized, meaning extremely *complicated and difficult* — atomic bomb and set it off in such a way that the fission products were *completely* contained. That's really, really unlikely.\n\nSo until more information is available about this most recent purported test, no conclusions can be drawn. Preliminary analysis based on seismic data suggests that once again, the yield of the alleged device was *implausibly* small, less than a third of the yield of the first ever (and crudest) atomic test. That means either the DPRK is *much better* at building atomic bombs than they have any right to be — highly unlikely — or this is just more theater, designed to confuse the uninformed rather than to actually effect any international policy change.\n\nBut the bottom line is that as of this writing, nobody knows anything yet, so we have to wait and see.",
"North Korea has a very broken farming system and is running out of food again, and it needs to get food from somewhere. Because it made other countries angry, they haven't been giving it food for awhile. NK leaders would look very bad if their people got hungry, so NK does this nuclear test that the whole world can see. It is a clever plan: it embarrasses world leaders in China and the US, who had told their people that they would stop NK from testing bombs, and makes them pay attention to NK.\n\nHere's how it works: the US and Chinese leaders need to look good to their people, which means they need to look like they are doing something to make NK stop. They need NK to show up to talks and promise to the whole world that they will stop making these bombs, at least for awhile. Now, NK then says they won't come to talks unless they get food (from US) and oil (from China). Since the US and China need them to talk or they will be really embarrassed, they will give them these things.\n\nThe US gives food because it looks to US people like an act of kindness and can't be used to make weapons. However NK leaders need to look good to their people too, so they remove the American flags from the boxes of food and put NK flags on it, and tell their people THEY grew the food.\n\nChina is worried that without oil, NK will fall apart and make a mess. Since they are neighbors, that mess could spill into China too. Maybe if they fall apart, the Americans will even move in, and that would be dangerous, because everyone in China knows how dangerous Americans can be! So China gives NK oil to keep them stable. NK leaders tell their people it is a nice gift from China, given to NK because of how big and strong NK is after making a big bomb.\n\nNobody is REALLY worried about the bombs themselves because they are pretty weak and very heavy, too heavy to put on rockets and planes and stuff, so NK can't really get the bomb anywhere yet and can pretty much only blow up nearby mountains. But it LOOKS and SOUNDS scary to most people, so the other leaders have to react.\n\nSo, NK gets the things it needs by doing something it shouldn't do, and promised not to do. They have done it before and it worked, so they are doing it again.\n\nTLDR: It is like throwing a tantrum because you are hungry, and making a lot of noise for no reason, and then you get fed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
7kzzyz | how does electroplating work? | How does electroplating work and what are its uses? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7kzzyz/eli5_how_does_electroplating_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"drihmgi"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You stick what you want to electroplate into a pool of metal ions. You then run a current through it (opposite to the ion charge sign you want to attract). The metal ions will stick to the thing you are electroplating.\n\nThere are tons of applications, from aesthetics (gold plating), adding conductivity (copper). You can even coat with anti rust substances, or harder materials to increase durability."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5rckj1 | is there scripture explaining why the devil punishes sinners? | I am not looking for a debate. I just never understood why the devil would punish people in hell if he went against God in the first place. Is there a scripture that explains why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5rckj1/eli5_is_there_scripture_explaining_why_the_devil/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd66657",
"dd6689m",
"dd69wiy"
],
"score": [
11,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"One of the rare moments I get to use my theology degree...\n\nThis is a commonly misunderstood concept; the devil is not the 'ruler' or jailer of hell. There is no scripture to support this. He's as much a prisoner and suffers just as much as any other soul in hell.",
"You're getting into later eras of Christianity for that.\n\n'The Devil' in the Bible is basically two separate figures who got conflated later on. I want to say by Dante, but I'm not certain. It's been a while since I studied that.\n\nAnyway, there's Lucifer and ha-Satan. Lucifer is the light bringer, the leader of the choirs who decided he could raise himself above God and was cast down for it. Basically a classical Promethean figure.\n\nThen there's ha-Satan, the main source of ideas of who 'the Devil' is, I think. He worked like God's prosecuting attorney. He's most prominent in Job in which he presses God to prove Job loves him unconditionally, and not just because he's been prosperous. He's a neutral figure in charge of testing people.\n\nIt was much later on in Christianity that these two were melded together a bit and it became kind of non-canon fanfiction that treated them both as 'The Devil' and mixed their stories together.",
"If you were to ask me, this question is flawed. I no longer believe in the bible, but as a strong ex-Christian, I can say that hell, from my point of view, was never something in the realm of reality. I was raised a Jehovah's Witness. We didn't believe in hell, but we were Christian. That is because there is no scripture supporting its evidence, at least not directly. There are references to hades and sheol. These have been translated to hell in most bibles, but it is understood that hades and sheol were terms used to describe the state of the dead, not a spiritual place you go to after death. \n\nAlso, Ecclesiastes 9:5 states the dead are conscious of nothing, therefore the existence of hell or even going to heaven after you die is contradictory. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
9ki3ow | how did the northern hemisphere become the top and the southern hemisphere become the bottom? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ki3ow/eli5_how_did_the_northern_hemisphere_become_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6z7juy"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The first maps we know about wit coordinate system is _URL_0_ by Ptolemy that was alive 100-170 AD (the map in the image is a later copy) a map like that have longitude line that merge on the north pole. In the case of this map it is a point above the map. If you fix a ruler there you can use it to draw line and measure the longitude. So form a map drawing perspective it practical to put the north pole up on the map if you live on the northern hemisphere..\n\nThe same it true for a terrestrial globe where you can see where you live on the northern part easy if it is on the top. \n\nSo when Europe started to maps and colonize the world the usage spread and id not the standard."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemy#/media/File:PtolemyWorldMap.jpg"
]
] |
||
aueax4 | why does a balloon feel like it loses helium while i hold it tightly, then regains that "lost" helium as let the balloon fly freely? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aueax4/eli5_why_does_a_balloon_feel_like_it_loses_helium/ | {
"a_id": [
"eh7kmle"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The pressure, and therefore volume, of gases varies based on a few factors, especially temperature. Most of the time it is colder in the morning and warmer later in the day, so the balloon shrinks as the gas has less pressure when it is cold and then grows as it get warmer. It has the same amount of gas, but the gas is taking up less space. Think of taking cotton candy and squishing it down. You are reducing the size, but not the actual amount, of the candy. \n\n\nAnd yes, you can squish it with your hands to, but when your hands aren't there to squish it down, it returns to its normal volume."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
39sii6 | what happened to old outbreaks like sars and ebola? no one tracks victims anymore. did the virus die out? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39sii6/eli5_what_happened_to_old_outbreaks_like_sars_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cs61o0e",
"cs61zh3"
],
"score": [
4,
7
],
"text": [
"They are no longer a threat to the Western World (and really never were) and so they are no longer news to the Western World. Once it was determined that the outbreaks were mostly contained other things took priority in the news cycles. ",
"They are still being tracked *by actual medical organisations*. The media however, who was only reporting on these diseases to hype up the danger and get views (often making the disease appear more dangerous than it was) has moved on.\n\nIf you want actual proper data on an epidemic, you need to consult sources like the CDC (who still are reporting on ebola [here](_URL_0_)), not the media."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/"
]
] |
||
3qhuo2 | why do companies go through with mergers/acquisitions if they're most likely to be denied by antitrust regulators? | Like AT & T/T-Mobile and the recent Walgreens/Rite Aid | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qhuo2/eli5_why_do_companies_go_through_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwfb92r",
"cwfe85r",
"cwfm65n"
],
"score": [
13,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"They aren't most likely to be denied. Most mergers go through without much of a fuss.\n\nLarge companies are more likely to be denied but it still gods through occasionally and the potential profits on the other end are worth the risk that the merger could be denied. The expense of putting together a merger is nothing compared to the amount of marker control they could have if its successful.\n\nIt's an investment and like all investments companies understand they might lose their investment.",
"Sometimes companies that are denied a M & A are able to work around it. As in the divest part of their business or give up some customers",
"Investment Banker here -\n\nTheoretically, it can be that the potential value of the merged entity is great enough to undertake the risk of the merger falling apart due to a variety of issues (regulatory, etc.)\n\nRealistically, usually at this stage of an m & a process (when it gets announced), the management team is pretty emotionally invested in the deal and work with their respective bankers/legal team to come up with a plan to get it approved. More often than not, the plan they put together is sufficient enough for the merger to see completion. Also, before the deal even reaches announcement the management team has probably been counseled time and time again about the risks (including regulatory), and are far along the process of completing and presenting their 'plan'. \n\nIf you believe in the efficient market hypothesis, the acquired Company's stock price should also accurately reflect the expected probability the deal sees completion. If you see the acquired Company's stock price quickly trend towards the offer price and stay there, it usually means the market is confident the deal will close."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2b0r2l | why do towels get dirty if i only ever use them after i get out of the shower (when i am presumably totally clean?) | Seriously it weirds me out. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2b0r2l/eli5_why_do_towels_get_dirty_if_i_only_ever_use/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj0ne0d",
"cj0nhbb",
"cj0q9ht",
"cj0t60a",
"cj1afgv"
],
"score": [
6,
15,
10,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"A wet towel is a great environment for bacteria and mold to grow. That generally puts them in the category of \"not clean anymore\", once you've used them to dry off.",
"As others have mentioned, the damp environment can make towels a good home for mold. But people also always shed skin. **always.** So even though you're clean when you're coming out of the shower, you still shedding skin into the towel.",
"you are never clean. no, not even then. ",
"you are clean. not sterile.",
"You presume incorrectly. You are *not* ever totally clean. Oils from your body get onto the towel and, combined with the lovely moist environment you've just created, the bacteria that cover nearly everything in your house enjoy the snack."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
22g3zp | why are executives always "asked to resign" instead of fired? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22g3zp/eli5_why_are_executives_always_asked_to_resign/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgmghf7",
"cgmghgt",
"cgmghq6",
"cgmgio9",
"cgmh98h"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Its cleaner, and you want to be professional. Getting fired opens up the company to being sued for \"wrongful termination\". Them resigning is much easier and usually is encouraged with \"and we'll give you some separation money\".",
"Professional courtesy. \n\n\nAt that level, positions have as much to do with politics as job performance, and so it's just polite to give someone the opportunity to not have been fired as long as they weren't sucking it up.",
"There's a lot less drama if you announce it as a resignation. And in reality, as an executive, if you're told that you're no longer useful to the company, there's no reason to insist on staying.",
"A couple reasons:\n\n1. Sometimes, the person has been with the company so long and has made so many connections that they want to give the person a chance to save face.\n\n2. It frequently looks bad for a company to hire someone and then fire them. That means the company lacked the wherewithal to screen their employees properly. A resignation looks better to outsiders, especially investors.",
"Courtesy, convenience, and saving face. \n \nSuppose you were responsible for hiring someone to do a difficult task that not many people are qualified to do. You find someone who looks like a superstar, and pay them a huge salary. \n \nThey worked hard, and perhaps did some good things. But you aren't getting all of the desired results. Could be that your person didn't do *all* the right things, maybe there were external factors that hindered success, maybe the company is really screwed up internally, whatever. In any case, you have to try again. Results are important, and for some reason your superstar didn't get them. \n \nIf you fire him/her, you may never work with the superstar again. In some industries, the community of people at the top isn't all that big. In the future, you might even be going to your old superstar looking for a job. And if you fire someone, their story isn't going to be that they were a loser who couldn't do the job, it is going to be that they couldn't succeed due to some factors...one of which might be *you*. \n \nFiring your \"superstar\" will certainly put a blemish on their career. It isn't the kiss of death, but it is serious. It's not like getting laid off from an assembly line because they don't need as many people as they previously did. If they get fired too many times, their career can be over. At the executive level, getting fired is often code for \"this person didn't just fail to get results, they fucked up royally\". Letting them resign demonstrates that things ended amicably. \n \nBecause the stakes are high, there's always the potential for a lawsuit, justified or not. That would eat up a lot of your time, and the time of other people, at a time when you have other pressing issues to concentrate on (you either now have a new executive or are looking for one, and you presumably still have the problem with not getting the desired results). It would probably be a distraction for the organization as whole, too. Better to let them resign, perhaps even with a severance package that ensures they won't bother you. \n \nAdd to all that the fact that people are going to ask the question: Why did you hire this person and give them all that money, just to turn around later and fire them? Are you incompetent at hiring? Better to be in a position where you can say it just didn't work out, no one is to blame. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
z4s5x | how do cellular carriers determine that you're tethering? | From my understanding, it's based on the user agent they see. But isn't that something easily bypassed? Feel free to explain it like I'm older than 5. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/z4s5x/eli5_how_do_cellular_carriers_determine_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"c61fav4"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"They count [hops](_URL_0_).\n\nThe way our current networking technology works, it is possible to tell how many different devices a packet hit between source and destination. When you tether, your laptop to cell phone communication introduces an extra hop.\n\nIt is possible to design a tethering app that deliberately hides the hop."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hop_%28networking%29"
]
] |
|
49rrnl | why do car horns (and other components) use relays instead of using normal switches/buttons similar to a house? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49rrnl/eli5_why_do_car_horns_and_other_components_use/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0ubrja",
"d0ubxy1",
"d0ucota"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
10
],
"text": [
"So they can use much smaller switches and wiring than the current draw would usually require. For the horn it's mostly the need for much smaller wiring through the steering column, but for things like the high beam it's just having a nicer feeling switch. Older cars didn't use relays there and the high beam switch was a pretty clunky foot operated thing.",
"? A car horn is activated by a momentary button in your steering wheel that you press to activate. That button may drive a relay, but a relay is just a switch activated by electricity instead of physical motion. Relays allow power systems to be isolated from each other, so a low power circuit can be run into the cabin of the car and that in turn can control a high power circuit that drives the horn.",
"Relays are used when you want a low current to be able to switch a large current. Low current wires can be a lot smaller (and safer), and more easily and cheaply go a lot further. \n\nSo let's say I wanted to be able to turn on and off the electricity coming from the generators at Hoover Dam. I could run wires to support that enormous current all the way to my house, then install a huge switch and all sorts of protection against electrical shorts and fires (oh, and lose money because of power dissipation on my long, gigantic wires). Or, I could put a relay in at Hoover Dam itself, and run a pair of very small wires over to my house, and put in a normal push button switch that not even the most clumsy and unfortunate person could possibly electrocute themselves on.\n\nIt works kind of the same way in your car, just on a smaller scale."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
bf0b63 | if the tongue is a muscle, and we care for muscles by massaging and stretching, why don’t we have the need to do that for the tongue? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bf0b63/eli5_if_the_tongue_is_a_muscle_and_we_care_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"el9v8ee"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The tongue isn't used nearly as often as muscles that commonly need massaging or stretching. Additionally massaging or stretching, while it often feels good, is only really necessary when you overwork muscles, something not common with your tongue."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3rhvkp | motherboards | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rhvkp/eli5_motherboards/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwo5rzq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"As long as you are going to one of the big reliable brands there's not many ways you can go wrong. you just need to make sure its compatible with your other parts (any relatively new MOBO with relatively new parts should be) and it has the features you want or will want, like cross-fire/SLI.\n\nand expensive mobo is expensive because of build quality and extra features and stuff. i would stick around the 100-125$ range on your average build. I got a MSI Gaming 5 for my gaming PC."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3kaad2 | what causes the orange around the pupil of my eye? | I have hazel eyes, the outer boarder is a brown and then the middle part is green but right around my pupil it is orange, why is this ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kaad2/eli5_what_causes_the_orange_around_the_pupil_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuw169m"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's called central heterochromia, or sectoral heterchromia. Central would be the ring radiating out from your eye, and sectoral is any spot in the eye with discoloration. There is also complete heterchromia where each eye is completely different. \n\nThe distribution of melanin in your eyes is not the same in each spot. It usually doesn't mean anything bad. It's just genetic. Consider yourself unique! Not many people have this."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2ejp7k | what is the intuitive explanation for the normal distribution curve. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ejp7k/eli5_what_is_the_intuitive_explanation_for_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck04gug",
"ck04ypd",
"ck07547"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Take a BB gun. Mount it on a vise or other holding device. Try shooting a target at a distance. You will the most concentration of the bullets at the center, spread out thinly. This is one of the examples.\n\nYou can fire the gun yourself, but it causes too much variability due to your body moving and recoil.",
"Many things in life have a significant degree of invariability. For instance, the erect male genital size. The average is 5.2 inches, but how much do people tend to vary from the mean? If it was a purely random dice roll, you'd have a nearly equal amount of people with 1 inch, 2, etc... all the way up to 11 or 12. But of course this isn't the case - instead, most people hover around 4.5 to 6 inches, with outliers being in the 6-7 or 4.5 to 3 range, and even fewer outliers beyond that. The size of the human male member, as a whole, would form a normal distribution.",
"Consider the carnival game Plinko, a version of which you can see regularly on \"The Price Is Right\" gameshow. In its simplest version, you drop a ball (or some other round object) at the top of the game and the ball encounters pegs that temporarily impede its motion downward. At each peg, the ball has a 50-50 chance of falling to the left (L) or to the right (R). A small version of the game might look like this, with dark circles representing pegs and the o row at the bottom representing all of the possible outcomes of any particular ball drop.\n\n •\n • •\n • • •\n • • • •\n o o o o o\n\nIt turns out there are six different ways it can end up in the middle o location:\n\n* LLRR\n* LRLR\n* LRRL\n* RLLR\n* RLRL\n* RRLL\n\nThe ball can get to either of the non-end locations to the left or right of center four ways. Here are the possibilities for end location #2, counting from the left.\n\n* LLLR\n* LLRL\n* LRLL\n* RLLL\n\nAnd the end locations can only be gotten to one way apiece. For the one on the left, that looks like:\n\n* LLLL\n\nThere are therefore 16 different ways the ball can travel downward. The number of outcomes that lead to each end location look like this:\n\n •\n • •\n • • •\n • • • •\n 1 4 6 4 1\n\nSo: 6 out of 16 paths (or 37.5%) end up in the center, 4 out of 16 paths (25%) end up left of center, and just 1 out of 16 paths (6.25%) ends up on the left-hand location. If the game is fair (the ball is round and evenly weighted, the pegs are aligned exactly, etc.), the ball is equally likely to choose any of the 16 paths, and we can expect an accumulation of actual tests to return similar results.\n\nThis is the essence of the normal distribution. The outcome with the most potential paths to it (and thus the most likely) is the middle outcome. The outcomes next to it are (symmetrically) next most likely, and the outcomes with the fewest possible paths (at the extremes) are the least likely to turn up.\n\nNote that any particular ball drop's result can't be predicted (or any few ball drops), but the more balls that are dropped, the more closely the distribution of the outcomes should correspond with the percentage of number of paths leading there. In other words, if you drop 16 million balls from the top, we can expect about a million in each end location, and about six million in the middle.\n\nThis is a simple example, but it should apply to anything that can be discribed with a normal distribution. Most people are in the middle of the intelligence curve, for example, because there are the most paths to the middle for our genes, experience and upbringing. Outliers at the edges of the intelligence curve get there because their genes, experience and upbringing traveled a particularly uncommon path. And so on."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1ys57u | cars] i understand why i have to change the oil in my car after a certain number of miles, but why do i have to do it after 6-12 months regardless if i haven't travelled very much? | I've always serviced my cars myself and generally changed the oil based on distance, disregarding time. I typically service early, only ever use fully synthetic and change the filter each time so I figure I'm quite safe.
Just got a newish car for my wife and in order to honour the warranty conditions, I need to get it serviced every six months (average car travels about 10,000km in that time, so I get it). Trouble is, the service interval on this car is 15,000km or 18 months. I've had the car almost 6 months and I now have to get it serviced. Trouble is, the car has done less than 2,500km since we bought it - the oil is still pristine! I realise the whole warranty thing (from used-dealership, not factory) is one big ripoff to force you to pay for overpriced servicing; since it has a maximum limit per claim and basically doesn't cover anything that's actually likely to go wrong with it.
BUT HERE'S MY ACTUAL QUESTION:
Why are service intervals like "10,000km or 12 months" and not just "10,000km"? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ys57u/eli5cars_i_understand_why_i_have_to_change_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfn9vtv"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because your car does both city and highway driving, but let's just use the extremes to demonstrate.\n\nIf you did nothing but highway driving with your car, you'd reach 10,000km very soon and well under 12 months. This is from all the wear and tear that results from driving your car 10,000km.\n\nBut what if you did nothing but city driving? Its much slower driving, so chances are it would take significantly longer than 12 months to reach 10,000km. However, even though your car is not physically moving as much, the engine is still working - the pistons are still churning, parts are still moving, and that oil is getting mucked about. So while you haven't reached 10,000km, after 12 months that engine oil will probably have been worked over into a viscous paste as a result of your months of slow driving.\n\nSo remember, these are ballpark figures. If you just don't drive your car much, then you could likely get away with stretching that oil out. However, idling your oil for long periods of time can be pretty bad too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
afu20q | why we can’t breathe 100% o2 & stay alive for a few minutes without breathing? | Edit: Thank you all guys. I was wrong 😁 | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/afu20q/eli5_why_we_cant_breathe_100_o2_stay_alive_for_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"ee1ergp",
"ee1lce9",
"ee1odgn"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
6
],
"text": [
"Your breathing reflex isn't triggered by lack of oxygen but by a build up of carbon dioxide which we produce by metabolism and need to get rid of. You feel an overwhelming need to take a breath long before you run out of oxygen. Breathing normal air, exhaled breath is about 16% O2, that's the same oxygen pressure as on a relatively modest 8000 foot mountain, still breathable for a healthy person.",
"Contrary to some other comments, you can breathe 100% oxygen for a long time without any noticeable detrimental effects. The adverse effects of breathing 100% O2 take a long, long, long time to become apparent. \n\nAs stated in another comment, it is the rise in CO2 that first triggers our urge to breathe. This is because under normal circumstances the CO2 will rise long before the oxygen will fall - even more so when you’ve got lungs full of 100% oxygen. However, a low oxygen concentration will also eventually trigger an urge to breathe, but this occurs at a dangerously low oxygen level. In fact, people who have chronically high CO2 levels, such as those with respiratory disease, have grown tolerant to the CO2 and have what’s called a “hypoxic drive” to their respiration i.e. they rely on low oxygen to trigger their breathing. If you give these people 100% oxygen they may stop breathing. \n\nIf you were to hyperventilate on 100% oxygen, then hold your breath, you would have a very low CO2 and a very high O2. Over the breath holding period, your CO2 would rise slowly and your oxygen levels would decrease slowly. Because of the lower CO2 starting point, you would not feel the need to breathe for a long time and would be able to hold for longer. This can be dangerous for divers. Sometimes they hyperventilate to lower their CO2 levels so they can stay underwater longer. But if they do this in normal air, what happens is that the oxygen levels fall before the CO2 levels rise. They can pass out from low oxygen while underwater, with no warning, because they never felt the urge to breathe. They then start breathing underwater while unconscious and inhale water and die. \n\nI am an anaesthetist and we routinely have patients breathe 100% oxygen just before we put them to sleep. This is because once they are asleep, they don’t breathe. We have a limited time to get a breathing tube in or they will die. If there are any problems and delays in doing this, we have bought ourselves a few more minutes before low oxygen levels cause death, because of the higher oxygen starting point and the longer time it takes for the oxygen to fall to a dangerous level. The difference in these patients is that we have taken away their normal breathing response to high CO2 with the drugs we use. So if we didn’t get a tube in, their CO2 levels would be very high (which would normally trigger breathing) their oxygen levels would be very low (which would normally trigger breathing) but they won’t breathe because we’ve obtunded this reflex or paralysed them. ",
"Your blood can only store so much O2. Once it's saturated, which it typically is while you are simply sitting and breathing deeply, it can't fold any more. Breathing air has plenty of O2 to saturate your blood, the air you exhale still has most of the oxygen it had when you inhaled it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
99g780 | stars vs gas planets | So, stars are largely made up of gasses, I know that and I know the basic definition of planets. But we have gas planets as well. I was wondering what is the distinction between gas planets and stars. It has some to do with the cores, right? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/99g780/eli5_stars_vs_gas_planets/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4ndkah",
"e4ndmzn",
"e4ndo8y",
"e4ng6zs",
"e4o40cx"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
8,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"A star has enough gravity to squeeze it's gases together so much that they start to undergo nuclear fusion, thus causing a star to radiate energy. A gas giant doesn't. \n\nIn between is gas giant and a star is a brown dwarf, which is not massive enough to sustain nuclear fusion of ordinary hydrogen to helium in their cores, but can fuse deuterium and lithium if their mass is large enough. They radiate a small amount of energy.",
"It has to do with the mass, mostly. The reason the Sun can fuse elements easily is because it gets a lot of help from gravity. When we do fusion here on Earth, we have to add a LOT of energy to the reaction to make it work. That's why it's difficult for us, but easy for the sun. It \"cheats.\"\n\n & #x200B;\n\nIf Jupiter had more mass, its hydrogen could be under enough pressure from gravity to make fusion happen.",
"Stars produce energy through a continuous fusion reaction in their cores. Gas giants do not. The smallest an object could be to sustain a hydrogen fusion reaction would be about 8% the mass of our sun.",
"It's all about the mass.\n\nMore mass = more gravity\n\nGas Giants and stars have alot of hydrogen. It's the most abundant and simplest element in the observable universe.\n\nStars turn hydrogen (1 proton) into helium (2 protons) and so forth to get most of the elements we know of. How does the star do that? Because it has so much mass. So much mass means so much gravity.\n\nThe gravity in stars is so great it can physically combine protons together in a process called nuclear fusion.\n\nGas Giants have alot of mass but not as much as stars. They don't quite have enough mass to make gravity strong enough to undergo nuclear fusion.\n\nSo now you can see it's all about the mass =]",
"Theres a critical mass, which is very specific (like an atom less would mean it doesn't start). And that is when a star is big enough to fuse Hydrogen into Helium.\n\nSo if you gave enough mass to Jupiter it would eventually take the mass. It would require something like 750 times its own mass. So it's really far off. \n\nAlso stars form in nebulae, planets form around stars. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5upl1t | what is this controversy pertaining to pewdiepie, the media, youtube and such? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5upl1t/eli5_what_is_this_controversy_pertaining_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddvusbz"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"A bunch of media outlets, particularly The Wall Street Journal, took him out of context and portrayed him as a white supremacist anti-Semite, and Nazi.\n\nWhich he's not.\n\nThis has pissed off anyone with a semblance of a brain, and caused a huge uproar amongst YouTubers who are tired of being slandered and libeled.\n\nTL;DR WSJ committed a crime."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
88xfod | why is it in languages where there is no alphabet but rather characters, such as mandarin, cantonese and japanese kanji, why can people understand the meaning of a word but not know how to say it? | In this video: _URL_0_
It states, "Everybody knows what it means but they can't read it." Why exactly is this, surely if you know what it means then you know the word.
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/88xfod/eli5_why_is_it_in_languages_where_there_is_no/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwnxqp3",
"dwnxswm",
"dwnyovy",
"dwnyto1",
"dwnyw19",
"dwo1teo",
"dwofz9f"
],
"score": [
16,
2,
20,
4,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Spoken and written language are learned separately. \nYou learned to say cow when you saw a cow. It just so happens that in English with letters tied to sounds you learnt to write it as c o w to represent the sound the word makes. \nItalians learn that a cow is called mucca. And they learnt to write that with a subset of the same alphabet used in English that represents the sounds needed for mucca. So they have a different word for the same thing to English speakers, but common characters for the sounds. \n\nWith Cantonese, mandarin and japanese speakers they also learnt the word for cow (Ngau, niu, and ushi respectively) in their own language, but they happen to have a common symbol for cow, not a phonetic spelling and an alphabet. \nSo naturally when they see the cow **or the symbol for cow**, they say the word in their own language...\n\nBut they don’t know how to say that word in the other languages. ",
"Often, complicated words are an amalgamation of simpler words into one. For example, in Mandarin, 人 (ren) and 众 (zhong) means person/people and public respectively. As you can see, many people make the public, yet the pronunciation is completely different.",
"How do you pronounce [this symbol](_URL_0_)? \nYou know what it means, but can't pronounce it. \nAlso Chinese has characters pronounced similarly look similar. \nFor example all these characters are pronounced with some tone of \"Ma\":马妈骂码. Though they all have wildly different meanings. \nThere used to be more overlap, but the language evolved while the writing stayed the same.",
"This video is a bit of a unique case for Japanese as well. In Japan there are three alphabets: hiragana, katakana, kanji and technically romanji as well. The real problem lies with kanji. Kanji means Chinese character and is the alphabet Japan adopted from China. They also brought with them the Chinese reading of the character, but applied it to Japanese words that already existed. This made it so each kanji has multiple ways to read it. For example, 大 is the kanji for \"big\" but it can be read as \"oo\" as in Osaka (大阪) or dai as in daigaku (大学). Sometimes there are more than two readings and there are sometimes unusual readings as well. So the problem becomes when you see compound kanji that you can be unsure which reading to go with. That's problem one. Problem two is that there are thousands of kanji. So you can be presented with a word but either a) never learned that character, b) forgot that character and/or c) not sure of the different reading of the character. So a combination of all of those can lead someone being unable to read a kanji compound. The same word if written in either of the other two alphabets would be instantly readable however. \n\nOr even simpler, think of an English word written verses hearing a word spoken. You can read a word but sometimes when you say it you pronounce it wrong because it has a different or unique pronunciation. It doesn't mean you don't know the word it just means you don't know how to say the word.",
"As other people in the thread said, the more complicated Hanzi/Kanji are often comprised of radicals, some of which may carry meaning and some may carry hints at pronunciation. \n\nIt is also really quite easy to get familiar with some specialized characters used, for example, in a certain scientific field without ever hearing the words they represent spoken aloud. You get the meaning from context or a dictionary, but you forget the dictionary pronunciation right away or never even bother to learn it.\n\nAlso, as a Mandarin as Third-Language speaker I should say that it's so much easier to read Chinese text or subtitles without trying to mentally say the words you see. Pronunciation completely slips past your mind and you get straight to the meaning.",
"I speak Japanese and this happens to me,especially with compound words. In compound words you might know the meaning and pronunciation of the individual characters, but when they are placed together you can only figure out the meaning based upon what you know the two of them mean separately. Each Japanese kanji can have many different pronunciations depending upon the circumstances so it's not always easy to look at a compound that you're unfamiliar with and know the pronunciation of it.",
"The people in the video may recognize the characters and understand the meaning. They just don't know how to *say* the word out loud. This is because they are ideograms - the characters represent ideas directly, without an intervening sound representation as with alphabets. Of course there is a way to pronounce each word represented by an individual ideogram or combination, but it's completely separate from the form of the ideogram. So it is possible to maintain an understanding of the meaning of written words without knowing how to pronounce them. If the word is frequently seen in written text but rarely heard spoken, one can forget how to say it. And because in Japanese each ideogram can have multiple pronunciations depending on context, it is possible to use those same words in speech without knowing that they are the same."
]
} | [] | [
"https://youtu.be/IARguDQIGVs?t=6m16s"
] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_symbol#/media/File:Radiation_warning_symbol.svg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bzoor8 | why do nations sell resources -e.g. oil- to each other, only to buy it from other countries? why not use what oil you need for your country, and sell the excess produced? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bzoor8/eli5_why_do_nations_sell_resources_eg_oil_to_each/ | {
"a_id": [
"equfg3d",
"eqvcp16"
],
"score": [
4,
4
],
"text": [
"Sell for more, buy for less -- > Profit\n\nAlso, afaik the US doesn't sell Oil anymore. They're hoarding it for themselves",
"In addition to differing prices (buy low sell high etc), it can also be a component of trade deals (i.e. a non-optimum oil exchange might be traded for trade agreements in something else, or even political support)\n\nthe other thing to consider is that oil isn't oil - by which I mean the composition and grade varies widely. Heavy crude would require additional refining facilities to turn it into the most usable products, and the yield tends to be a bit lower than light, sweet crude, which is more easily turned into petrol and diesel (just for example)\n\nfor this reason countries may specialise in refining, so they import heavier liquids, refine them (where they get efficiency due to specialising) and then export the refined liquids at a higher price - singapore is a good example of this, as they have only modest reserves of oil natively, however are about the 3rd or 4th largest refined oil exporters in the world"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4jktye | why are many predatory insects so voracious? | I just watched a documentary in which a giant forest mantid devoured a spiny leaf insect at least twice its size, then immediately went back on the hunt.
Most of the other predators are described as being very similar.
Many other animals would be fine for a while after such a big meal. What is it about insects which requires them to eat so much? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4jktye/eli5_why_are_many_predatory_insects_so_voracious/ | {
"a_id": [
"d37ixce"
],
"score": [
237
],
"text": [
"Well I'm no expert on predators but I know my way around Insecta. Your mantid there is very short lived compared to other animals, and she will need to carb load fast AF to get swole enough to produce eggs. In the r-selected species (lots oF babies) it's all about getting big fast before you get eaten. \n\nAlso, that stick/leaf she ate may look big, but they are mostly exoskeleton which is made of chitin and not super nutritious. It's the goo in the middle your mantid needs to get swole. Think Alaska crab legs, can't really eat the shell, need the middle part. Mammals, which is what most people think of when they think animals (racist) are mostly goo, and a much better meal. A lion can eat a wildebeest and be passed the fuck out bc of all the calories. That same lion would have to eat a metric ass load of leaf insects, which is totally gross to the lion, and would piss it right off. Well I think lions are gross so fuck you lion. \n\nThat's my guess. Stay in school kids. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
wor99 | why do my glasses fog up when it's humid out? | i just got to thinking last night getting out of my car to go to work, i know it's a function of the heat and humidity (i live in georgia), but i honestly have no idea the mechanics of it.
and i'd like to know in case there's something i can do to reduce it, because it's honestly pretty annoying to get out of my car and have my glasses *instantly* go, "foof! we're foggy now!" | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/wor99/eli5_why_do_my_glasses_fog_up_when_its_humid_out/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5f4e5g",
"c5f6nuo"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"If your glasses are cooler than the air outside, water vapor from that air will condense on them, especially at high levels of humidity. Maybe glycerine (rain-x) would help.",
"There may be other processes at work here if this is occurring over the summer time, but this is what I feel is happening: Warm air can contain more moisture than cool air. When you enter a relatively warm environment, your glasses will cool the immediately surrounding air. Since the air is getting colder, but the moisture contained is not changing, the water vapor in the air condenses onto your glasses. A similar event happens when you have a cold drink on a hot day.\n\nKeep on mind that this only explains \"fogging\" for when you go from a cold to a warm environment. If your situation differs, this explanation may not be relevant to you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
86k3zs | how is radiotion, a carcinogenic, is used in cancer treatment? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/86k3zs/eli5_how_is_radiotion_a_carcinogenic_is_used_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"dw5mpjj",
"dw5mput",
"dw5n1lr",
"dw613hu"
],
"score": [
12,
5,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Radiation may cause tumours occasionally, but it also directly kills cells. Like most anti-cancer treatments, radiation kills both cancerous and healthy cells. The trick is to make it hit more of the ones you want to affect. That may be achieved by directing the beam in from many separate directions over time, with the tumour at the aiming point. On it's way, the radiation passes through different parts of the body each time but every time it passes through the tumour. So all the other parts receive a smaller dose than the target.\n\nAnother is to use a radioactive substance that preferentially goes to the right place. Using radioactive iodine is one example as it concentrates in the thyroid gland so is a treatment for hyperthyroidism.",
"The radiation is aimed very precisely in a beam at the tumour, from multiple angles. (Imagine a bike wheel, \nWhere the hub is the tumour And the spokes are the angles the beam comes from) - only the tumour is in every beam, the surrounding tissue gets a much lower dose so theoretically only the tumour dies. \n\n\nObviously in a person the beam is shaped and angled to account for bones and more sensitive organs to maximise the tumour dose and minimise the rest. ",
"Cancer is only a possibility when radiation slightly damages the DNA. At high enough doses, radiation completely destroys DNA, causing cell death. Which for cancer is good, because cancer in a nutshell is uncontrolled growth of cells. Killing the cells stops the growth.\n\nSo doctors use very specialized tools to aim the radiation EXACTLY where the cancer is to minimize cell death in the non-cancer cells.",
"Same way a knife, a stab-ogenic, is used in surgery.\n\nJust because something is bad sometimes doesn't mean it is bad always. Being exposed to random radiation or stabbings is a bad thing, but using them very precisely can be a good thing."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1dbyt1 | why is there a need for so many types of video formats? | For example, AVCHD DVCAM XDCAM DVCHD? Why can't everyone just use the same thing? The same goes for aspect ratios, like 1.85:1, 1.78:1, 2.35:1. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dbyt1/eli5_why_is_there_a_need_for_so_many_types_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9ouqrg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Different video formats have different uses. For example, compression, quality, sound vs. video, compatability, all take a part."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.