q_id
stringlengths 5
6
| title
stringlengths 3
296
| selftext
stringlengths 0
34k
| document
stringclasses 1
value | subreddit
stringclasses 1
value | url
stringlengths 4
110
| answers
dict | title_urls
sequence | selftext_urls
sequence | answers_urls
sequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6s3m7y | why is it so difficult for people to change their perspective on something when the evidence clearly shows that they are wrong? | Particularly what I am wondering about is why it seems most people react with anger or fear when faced with evidence they may be wrong about something. I do understand it on some level, we are naturally inclined to look for the things that back up our own beliefs and reject the information that doesn't fit but I don't quite understand why this is such a difficult task for people and why it often turns into anger or even hate towards said evidence. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6s3m7y/eli5_why_is_it_so_difficult_for_people_to_change/ | {
"a_id": [
"dl9ts1p",
"dl9umeb",
"dl9ux46",
"dl9vg7w"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
13,
3
],
"text": [
"It's called the pooper scooper man fallacy. People don't like to be shown theit ideas might be wrong.",
"It's been called the backfire effect - contrary evidence doesn't change the (presumed wrong) opinion, but rather entrenches it. It's a form of [confirmation bias](_URL_0_).",
"This is the best (and most enjoyable) explanation I've ever found. _URL_0_",
"We often think of a belief as something based on evidence and argument, since that's the ideal, but in reality it is much messier than this. We might believe something because someone who we like also believes it, or because it makes us feel good, or because we fear a world in which it is untrue. If that's the case, we're emotionally invested in the belief, and will naturally respond with fear or anger when it's threatened.\n\nOne powerful example is beliefs that are essential to some way of life, like a religion (or a family or a social group or a workplace). If giving up your religion would mean you no longer belong to your community, then changing your belief would have enormous practical and emotional consequences, causing you to abandon the only life you know. Evidence is almost irrelevant when it comes to beliefs like that."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias"
],
[
"http://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe"
],
[]
] |
|
3bupd6 | how can a scam like publishers clearing house still exist after so many years? no one actually believes they just became millionaires, right? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bupd6/eli5_how_can_a_scam_like_publishers_clearing/ | {
"a_id": [
"cspoh0m",
"csqe73r"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"It is a lottery competition. They actually do have winners who do get the money they are promised. If it were a scam it would be illegal and they would be shut down, but so long as there are some winners (even if it is rare) they are not doing anything illegal so long as the State they are in allows lotteries. ",
"Publishers Clearing House is *not* a scam, it's a very successful magazine subscription business. Their sweepstakes is completely for real, and the do award the prizes.\n\nThey can afford the prizes because magazine publishers pay them big bucks to push magazine subscriptions.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1zac0e | why do inanimate objects make popping noises randomly? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zac0e/why_do_inanimate_objects_make_popping_noises/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfrwjqh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Probably due to the build up of gases or a change in temperature.\n\nMany materials contract or expand when subject to colder or hotter temperatures. This expansion or contraction can result in noises, but they mostly sound like creaks and not pops.\n\nWhen a gas is built up though, the pressure rises. Beyond a certain point, the pressure is too much for the object to hold and it escapes through an opening or forces its way out, which an be heard as a pop.\n\nI hope this made sense."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
32edp1 | if someone going above the speed of sound were to scream at the direction opposite to where they are traveling, would they be unable to hear themselves? | Because the sound can't catch up to their ears? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32edp1/eli5if_someone_going_above_the_speed_of_sound/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqag0d0",
"cqagt3t"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Sound vibrations carry through membranes and bones, doesn't need to be 'airborne' for you to hear your own self talk.",
"Just something I find interesting to add: a person standing in the way you are moving would not be able to hear what you say. I think this sort of answers the question without having to worry about the effect of the body on sound. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
m6oie | why are flash and silverlight abandoning mobile support in favor of html5? | I have the vague sense they're bloated and it's hard to have them support all mobile OS but I don't understand why HTML5 is better. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/m6oie/eli5_why_are_flash_and_silverlight_abandoning/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2yjvwk",
"c2yjvwk"
],
"score": [
9,
9
],
"text": [
"I'm going to get down-voted to hell for this, but here goes...\n\nFlash and silverlight mobile versions aren't up to par with their desktop counterparts. They are buggier, and run a lot more slowly. They also use a LOT of resources. \n\nThat said, HTML5 isn't necessarily better. It's different. It can do some of the things that used to require flash to do, but there are a **lot** of things it can't do. The advantage to it is that if a mobile browser supports HTML5 that content can be loaded without much overhead to the browser. ",
"I'm going to get down-voted to hell for this, but here goes...\n\nFlash and silverlight mobile versions aren't up to par with their desktop counterparts. They are buggier, and run a lot more slowly. They also use a LOT of resources. \n\nThat said, HTML5 isn't necessarily better. It's different. It can do some of the things that used to require flash to do, but there are a **lot** of things it can't do. The advantage to it is that if a mobile browser supports HTML5 that content can be loaded without much overhead to the browser. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3bvi3f | - what are carbs? | Like Ano potatoes and pastes and bread are but someone said chocolate are carbs , so now I'm confused | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bvi3f/eli5_what_are_carbs/ | {
"a_id": [
"cspv4ry",
"cspvaqt"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Carbohydrates. Literally, hydrates (molecules containing water or hydrogen/oxygen) of carbon. In short, molecules consisting of carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen. \n\nIt includes starches, cellulose, and sugars, which are important in a lot of biology. They aren't essential in humans, but are a common source of energy. ",
"Biological molecules with the formula Cy(H20)x. This means they are made up of Carbon, Hydrogen and Oxygen although other foods can contain other things but if they are predominantly carbohydrates then the whole food is considered a carb. There are simple base units of carbs called monosaccharides and they can join together to form polysaccharides, common ones that you may have heard of are gluocse, sucrose, starch. They tend to act as a form of energy storage. When respiring carbs are relatively easily broken down for quick energy in comparison to proteins. But basically to answer your question, sugars are carbs and so are things like milk. So it makes sense that a lot of food you will come into contact with would be carbs."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
5ghd8l | why do some programs require you use their way of uninstalling them? | I'm going through deleting some bloatware right now and sometimes when I uninstall a program the program pops up and is like "HEY, WHY ARE YOU UNINSTALLING ME" instead of it just being removed liek normal. Why do they require I use the program to uninstall it instead of just hitting uninstall in the control panel. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ghd8l/eli5_why_do_some_programs_require_you_use_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"das86qk",
"dasegtw"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
" > Why do they require I use the program to uninstall it instead of just hitting uninstall in the control panel.\n\nHitting uninstall in the control panel just tells the program to uninstall itself. It's just that most programs will uninstall silently instead of prompting you for more info. But that's not a requirement.",
"Because in Windows since time immemorial, the OS provided no installation facility, and programs are responsible for installing themselves. So there's a bunch of installation systems, each with their own bugs and features. It also means uninstallation is fully under the control of your program's maker, and may not even be provided at all.\n\nIf you go to Linux there's another way of doing things entirely: programs are packaged, and it's the system's package manager that installs and uninstalls things. This is generally far more reliable because a single central system manages everything, and uninstallation is automated: the package manager knows what files it added, so it can remove them easily.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4aynck | why is refrigeration not required for single use coffee creamer shots? | Its a dairy product, right? How can they be stored at room temperature without going bad? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4aynck/eli5_why_is_refrigeration_not_required_for_single/ | {
"a_id": [
"d14k7ek",
"d14kc3z",
"d14rqc8",
"d14s5oh",
"d14wzsh"
],
"score": [
12,
141,
33,
4,
6
],
"text": [
"Because its been pasteurized and sealed in an airtight container. They killed all the bacteria and then sealed it so new bacteria couldnt get in.\n\nIf you opened one and set it out itd go bad very quickly.",
"They are [ultra high temp pasteurized](_URL_0_) and sealed, like shelf stable boxed milk is. As long as they are unopened, no bacteria, etc. can grow inside the container.",
"Check the ingredients. Often times the creamers aren't dairy at all. Usually water, oil, some kind of emulsifier, something to make it white, and some other additives to make sure it stays like that for years. ",
"Dairy product? Don't you see long-term milk in the supermarkets? Almost all the milk sold where I live is like that. It is sold without refrigeration and does not go bad for months.\n\nIt is sad, I guess.",
"Outside of the US, it's common for regular milk to be ultra high temperature pasteurized and cartons don't need to be refrigerated until after they are opened. Those single use dairy creamers are pasteurized the same way."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.100daysofrealfood.com/2013/07/31/uht-why-some-milk-is-not-refrigerated/"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3mmzfu | the flat earth society | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mmzfu/eli5_the_flat_earth_society/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvgdmdc"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"its more or less a joke. There are some conspiracy theorists who still believe that the earth is flat, and that the government/NASA is lying to them, but so much of their community are people just trying to have a laugh that it invalidates everything. I mean, invalidates it more than their ridiculous theories anyway"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6dso1p | the painful shuddering hearing nails running on metal or chalkboards | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6dso1p/eli5_the_painful_shuddering_hearing_nails_running/ | {
"a_id": [
"di53b2i"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The sound created by nails running on a chalkboard has a frequency in the 2000Hz - 4000Hz. Our ear canal tends to enter a state of resonance at those frequencies, which means these sounds are amplified. Furthermore, we have a mechanism in our ear called the acoustic reflex (or stapedius reflex), which contracts our ear canal in order to muffle high volume sounds. This reflex kicks in about 10 ms after you hear the sound, but the high pitched sounds created by nails or a piece of chalk are formed of a repeated sequence of 4-5ms impulses, thus rendering this reflex useless. As a result you perceive an uncomfortable screech that causes your \"painful shudder\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2qlnvj | why is it so frowned upon to go to sleep late even if you get 8 hours of sleep in total? | I guess it does mess up your body by staying up late but as long as you get 8hrs, shouldn't you be fine? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qlnvj/eli5_why_is_it_so_frowned_upon_to_go_to_sleep/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn783dz",
"cn796t9"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Your body has something called a [circadian rhythm](_URL_0_), which is a 24 hour sleep / wake cycle that is attuned to the day night cycle of the planet, you naturally sleep better at some times during this cycle than at others.",
"I think most people who frown upon sleeping late do so simply because they associate it with being lazy, over indulgent, unproductive, and wasting the day. Aside from that, sleeping late can mess up your sleeping schedule if you typically have to get up early. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/c/circadian_rhythm.htm"
],
[]
] |
|
3p8odq | why do we see off-brand shoes, clothes, etc. but not off-brand cars, motorcycles, etc.? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3p8odq/eli5_why_do_we_see_offbrand_shoes_clothes_etc_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"cw42n0k",
"cw43r2k",
"cw44w60"
],
"score": [
13,
3,
9
],
"text": [
"Because it's incredibly expensive to even to *start* to make a car or motorcycle. It's relatively inexpensive to make clothes.",
"Because automobiles are subject to crash safety standards. Without those in place we would have plenty of off brand crappy cars.",
"There are, were, plenty of \"off brand\" cars and motorcycles. The Ural, for example, is a Russian rip-off of a BMW. The [Chinese](_URL_0_) made copies of American cars and European motorcycles."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.quora.com/Why-do-the-Chinese-automobile-makers-copy-the-designs-of-the-top-automobile-brands"
]
] |
||
356c5w | if jesus died for our sins so people can go to heaven, did all people go to hell before jesus lived and died? | Sorry if that sounds stupid, I'm just not really a religious person. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/356c5w/eli5_if_jesus_died_for_our_sins_so_people_can_go/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr1dm9o",
"cr1dsdz",
"cr1e63z",
"cr1ep5g"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
4,
6
],
"text": [
"It doesn't sound stupid at all, i am religious and i havent even thought about this. But still, here's my answer, agree with it or not.\n\nScripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, \"hell\"— Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek—because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God. Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into \"Abraham’s bosom\": \"It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell.\" Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.\n\n**TL;DR nor want to turn religious:**\n\n**When he went to hell he freed the just who had died before he died for our sins**",
"As I recall the Catholic dogma as I learned it in the 80s, before Christ everyone ended up in limbo, with the devout ones in the 'Limbo of the Fathers', to wait for the eventual End of Times.\n\nOne of the things Jesus did was to open the gates of Heaven, allowing those that earned it to ascend to Heaven and God's presence. The rest went to Purgatory.\n\n(I'm a lapsed Catholic for many a year so I have no idea how correct or current this idea still is.)",
"Okay so I don't remember the exact terminology that is used in this case but will try to explain as best I can. There are 4 or 5 different thoughts on the after life.\n\n 1.) Being that Jesus is the Messiah and that the only way to enter heaven was through recognition that he is your lord and savior. Anyone else is hell bound, including the ones who lived before his time.\n\n2.) The way to eternal life was to just be a good person and do things for others. But you had to be a Christian and believe in Jesus. \n\n3.) Is much like #2 but you didn't have to be a Christian you just had to be morally good.\n\n4.) There is no heaven or hell because there is no scientific evidence to support the claims. \n\n5.) This last one I had never even heard about until it was covered in my world religions class. It was the Jesus was the only way to be accepted into heaven (same as 1) and if you were not accepted into heaven you went to hell, BUT God felt sorry about sending people to hell because it explains that God created man and by the definitions given that means he would know whether he/she would go to heaven or hell at creation. So in turn when people went to hell they were not banished there for eternity but after a period of time he would just smite them and put them out of their misery so to speak aka blowing them up.",
"Not a stupid question at all, it's actually a very good question regardless of whether or not you believe in Christianity. Like several of these comments mention, there are different beliefs for different branches and denominations of Christianity. I'll give you my perspective based on my beliefs as I see them from Scripture (evangelical Christian-Southern Baptist).\n\nTo set the stage: We are justified (made right) before God by acknowledging that we can never live up to God's standard of perfection, and having faith that Jesus did live up to God's standard of perfection, and died for our sins, and his righteousness is credited to us (grace).\n\nNow the best way I know to look at it is people in the Old Testament *looked forward* to Jesus. Romans 4:3: \"Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.\" In other words, Abraham *knew* he couldn't live up to God's standards, but he *believed* that God would one day do something about that (send Jesus). Therefore, Abraham did *believe* in Jesus, just not in the sense that people today *believe* in Jesus. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bp799c | why are penis vein patterns so different from penis to penis? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bp799c/eli5_why_are_penis_vein_patterns_so_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"enpjmvh"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Everybody's veins are a little bit different. The same can be said for iris and retina patterns, and for prints from the nose, lips, tongue, and ears besides fingers and feet."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3r4zmg | when in time did people start overeating and becoming overweight? was it a sudden change or gradual shift? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3r4zmg/eli5_when_in_time_did_people_start_overeating_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwkx8nc",
"cwkxmxh"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"There have always been *some* obese people. However, it [really spiked up during the late 70's through the 90's](_URL_0_) in the US. There is a lot of ongoing research into what factors led to this, but it's likely a host of different things we eat coupled with a bunch of ways our lifestyles changed over that time period.",
"Food became cheap and abundant at the same time fewer people had jobs that required physical exertion.\n\nEating more + moving less = gaining weight"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://media.mercola.com/assets/images/obese.gif"
],
[]
] |
||
2urwxf | if there is no drag in space, would i need to keep my spaceship engines on constant burn to get anywhere in space? or can i just maybe start the engine for several minutes to give my ship initial thrust, turn the engine off and still be able to maintain speed? | I noticed that in sci-fi movies and video games, spaceships maintain a constant burn, so I'm not sure if that's just for aesthetics or is that really how things would work.
(For my question, let's just pretend that I am not travelling through a dense section of space, where drag may exist. Maybe just from Earth orbit to Mars or something.) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2urwxf/eli5_if_there_is_no_drag_in_space_would_i_need_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cob2zcb",
"cob33hz",
"cob3bah",
"cobbl6b",
"cobc3br"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In space's vacuum, you are right. There is no drag, and an object will maintain velocity indefinitely. A burn is only needed to accelerate.\n\nMany games that simulate space, simulate this as well. Kerbal Space Program pops into mind, but even Asteroids has your little craft float at the same speed unless it hits something or you accelerate.",
"Depends on exactly where you are going. From Earth to Mars without gravity assists, you need to fight the gravity well of the Earth and the Sun. So you need to burn fuel in the same way a car needs to burn fuel to go up a hill. To go toward a gravity well, you just need to slow down enough so you can \"slide\" down the gravity well (again, like a car sliding down a hill). To go from orbit to a body, you need a way to kill your orbital speed enough so you fall. This is all hand-waving and an eli5 version. It is obviously more complicated, but it (should) get the idea across enough. ",
" > I noticed that in sci-fi movies and video games, spaceships maintain a constant burn, so I'm not sure if that's just for aesthetics or is that really how things would work.\n\nIn actuality, it would be problematic. As they continue to 'burn' they continue to accelerate. They won't simply 'slow down' once they turn the engine off, and there's no brakes in space, so once they get where they are going, they'd likely be traveling at a tremendous relative velocity. They'd then have to turn the ship around and decelerate an equivalent amount of time (in a simplified scenario where start and destination are at rest to one another) to stop at the destination.",
"Look into the game Kerbal Space Program, and play the free demo. Its got realistic orbit mechanics , and taught me more about spacetravel than any book did. ",
"Lots of good info here already, so I'll just add an example. Here's a cool scene from Babylon 5 where they cut main thrusters and spin the ship to aim their weapons while maintaining their travel in the same direction:\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wk3ro-QEiBg"
]
] |
|
3xsl7w | can a person who stutters who later in life becomes deaf stutter their sign language? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3xsl7w/eli5_can_a_person_who_stutters_who_later_in_life/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy7fnv3"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"No. Stuttering is a problem people have translating their thoughts into the complex tongue and mouth movements needed to create speech.\n\nStuttering is different however from stumbling on your words, like when you don't know what to say or you forget the word you're looking for or you say the wrong word. Deaf people using sign language do sometimes have this problem, like anyone else would. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2dlotv | can we manually keep a person alive forever? | Like through machines. Automatic heart so the blood always flows and other stuff (I'm not doctor I don't know)... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dlotv/eli5_can_we_manually_keep_a_person_alive_forever/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjqosyh",
"cjqp3u4",
"cjqq1nm",
"cjqrh38",
"cjqwa53",
"cjqx8nc"
],
"score": [
14,
9,
5,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"No. Cells are programed to die, each time new cells are created to replenish the dying cells mutations occur in the DNA, once enough mutations occur the cell is unable to preform as it should.",
"Each of our cells is splitting and dividing to stay fresh; it has a limited number of times it can do that. This is part of why older people's bodies get weaker.\nAt least one person has been found with an \"immortal\" cell line, like wolverine: _URL_0_",
"On a more pragmatic point, even if cells didn't mutate and eventually lead to death, artificially supporting life is full of complications. Laying in bed with a breathing tube and a feeding tube puts you at huge risk for blood clots in the legs (stagnant flow from not moving= > clots) , which can travel to the lungs and kill you. Pneumonias and bedsores from laying in bed can also be life threatening. \n\n ",
"There's a very interesting documentary by the Discovery Channel presented by Adam Savage (Myth Busters) on the subject.\n\nUnfortunately, I could no longer find the complete show on YouTube, but here's a tidbit:\n\nDiscovery Curiosity - Can You Live Forever?: _URL_0_\n\nThe show's a bit speculative and a bit hopeful. I don't want to spoil the ending though.",
"we don't have the technology to replace and repair many of our finer systems.",
"I imagine if you were a doctor you probably wouldn't be asking this question :P. But no it isn't possible. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks"
],
[],
[
"http://youtu.be/n4Ew9XWSYQ0"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
ey9ebz | whats the difference between electromagnetism and gravity? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ey9ebz/eli5_whats_the_difference_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"fgftrsa",
"fgfu5tf"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"#Electromagnetism:\n\nAccording to the [Standard Model of Particles](_URL_3_), electromagnetism is one of the fundamental forces, along with the strong force, the weak force and gravity, sort of. \n\nThe strong force and the weak force are only relevant on sub-atomic scales, so we don't accouter them in our daily lives. Electromagnetism, on the other hand, is the force between charged particles. It is responsible for binding electrons to atomic nuclei and for binding atoms together to form molecules. \n\nThe – somewhat unsatisfactory – answer to the question as to *why* charged particles attract and repel each other is: because this is the way our universe seems to work. There really is no underlying reason *why* this is the case, as far as we know. Charge is a fundamental property of particles, and cannot be explained in terms of other properties. \n\n > I know understandings about magnetism are relatively hypothetical right now,\n\nI am not really sure what you mean by this. Electromagnetism is probably the best understood force out there. \n\n#Gravity:\n\nRemember when I said that gravity was sort of one of the fundamental forces? Well, I lied. The Standard Model of Particles cannot explain gravity, so instead we have to turn to the [Theory of General Relativity](_URL_2_) for answeres, as General Relativity (GR) is the best theory of gravity we have. \n\nAnd according to GR, gravity is not a force at all and its source is not only mass, but energy density, momentum density, momentum flux, shear stress and pressure. \n\nIn GR, gravity is not modeled as a force, but as a curvature of spacetime. In Newtonian mechanics, space and time are like a theater stage: unchanging and unaffected by the actions of the players. In GR, however, space and time are no longer separate entities. They are two sides of the same coin. What may be a distance in space from the perspective of one observer might be a distance in time for another. Furthermore, spacetime is no longer unaffected by the presence of energy and matter: energy curves spacetime and alters its geometry. \n\nIn the words of physicist John Wheeler: \n\n > *Spacetime tells matter how to move; matter tells spacetime how to curve.* \n\nThis has a few fundamental consequences: in flat geometries, for example, two lines that are parallel at one point remain parallel for all points. \n\nIn a curved geometry, however, two parallel lines can meet. Consider the [this](_URL_1_) example: Imagine two objects that are moving along the lines perpendicular to the equator. They start out parallel, and move in a straight line upwards. Despite the fact that neither of them is turning, the two objects that started out moving along parallel lines will meet at the north pole. Such trajectories, that lead across curved surfaces without turning are called [geodesics](_URL_0_) and they can be thought of as straight lines on curved surfaces. Objects under the influence of gravity follow geodesics. \n\nWhat that means in physical terms is, that force free objects can follow trajectories that appear to be curved to outside observers in the presence of gravity. For example, the ISS orbiting the earth along a geodesic. The reason why astronauts are floating on board of the ISS is not, as commonly believed, that there is no gravity in space. Rather, the ISS is force free because gravity is not a force, but the curvature of spacetime itself. That is, the ISS is following a \"straight\" line through a curved geometry, and as such is not subject to any outside forces.",
"Matter (elemental particles, protons, neutrons, electrons, photons, neutrinos, quarks, etc.) has \"properties\" such as mass, electrical charge, spin, [color](_URL_3_), [flavour](_URL_2_). Some of these (color, flavour) are named so because physicists picked those names, and not because that's what the particles look like (and there's no \"smell\" or \"taste\" for particles).\n\nIn any case, some of these properties have forces associated with them. Mass has an associated force, gravity, electrical charge has an associated force electromagnetism (electrical force AND magnetic force), color has an associated force (the strong nuclear force). \n\nHow these forces are generated and how they interact with particles is studied under various branches of physics (gravity, electromagnetism, quantum chromodynamics), and is somewhat complicated. But, basically, the forces don't \"interact\" with each other, you can think of them as separate, but in nature you see multiple forces acting at the same time.\n\nAnyway, the Earth creates gravity because of all the mass (material) that it has. The Earth creates a [magnetic field](_URL_0_) because the Earth is more like an egg with a liquid iron yolk. The crust is solid and we live on it, but the interior is liquid, molten stone and a molten iron center that spins, and iron conducts electricity and can [create magnetism if it's spinning](_URL_1_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesic",
"http://pi.math.cornell.edu/~dwh/books/eg99/Ch06/3776c40d.jpg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_magnetic_field",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamo_theory",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavour_(particle_physics\\)",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_charge"
]
] |
||
5laeb9 | what would happen if a light-emitting object moved at or above the speed of light? would it produce a light "shockwave"? | Obviously I know nothing can move above the speed of light, but I'm just curious how the Doppler effect would react to it. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5laeb9/eli5_what_would_happen_if_a_lightemitting_object/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbu51nu",
"dbu51p8"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Since the physics of our universe prevents any massive object to move at or above the speed of light, there is no way to answer this question within the framework of our universe. If you break the fundamental laws of physics, it is meaningless to apply the very same laws to the problem. \n\nThat being said, there is sort of an equivalent to the sonic boom. [Cherenkov radiation](_URL_0_) occurs when charged particles move through a medium as speeds greater than the speed of light in that medium. This radiation occurs most commonly in pool-type nuclear reactors. High energy electrons are released into a pool of water and move at speeds higher than the speed of light in water. The result is the characteristic blue glow of those reactors.\n\n",
"Yes, kind of. The phenomenon resulting from exceeding the local speed of light is known as Cherenkov radiation, and is the cause of the blue glow in nuclear power stations. The speed of light in water is lower than that in air, so particles enter water at a speed higher than the local speed of light. The excess energy is dumped as photons, and may be any colour or even X-rays or gamma rays if the particle's initial speed is high enough. \n\nAny object exceeding the local speed of light is therefore a light-emitting object. Its *apparent* colour is affected by the Doppler effect, but there is no 'shockwave' as such because light can't be caught up with even by its emitter. Therefore the frequency appears to change. Standing in front of the object you would observe bluer light being emitted, while behind it you would observe redder light. \n\nThis is also how we tell how far away other stars are, and how fast they are moving."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation"
],
[]
] |
|
2gbugy | why can schools impose affirmative action policies, but don't have to apply them to their athletic programs? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gbugy/eli5_why_can_schools_impose_affirmative_action/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckhjq5s"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"There is but it's for males vs females\n\nTitle IX"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8n1et8 | the hawaiian volcano eruption is threatening a geothermal plant. why can't we "spray" the incoming magma with water to cool it and build a "wall" protecting certain areas? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8n1et8/eli5the_hawaiian_volcano_eruption_is_threatening/ | {
"a_id": [
"dzs01bb"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"That would work if there wasn't so much lava. The amount of water needed to cool it is astronomical, and you would need to dig a trench, and they can't dig one deep enough fast enough, I think."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
606ib7 | in ancient and medieval times, did people really just kill disabled people? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/606ib7/eli5_in_ancient_and_medieval_times_did_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"df3tmli"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In some cultures, yes. The disabled can in some cases be an enormous drain on time and resources, to the point of making life much more difficult for others. In a society where resources are extremely limited, the tough choice might be made. In most modern cultures, this is no longer a choice that has to be made."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
12epqu | please eli5: what the bible has to say about people who belong to lgbt groups. | First of all, I'm sorry if that's offencive, I have no idea how to phrase that.
Second, I have asked one of my Christian friends, and she gave me a pretty good example. "Well, there was only one boy, Adam, and one girl, Eve, and that's how God wanted it to be."
However, there was another girl, Lilith. She seems to be widely ignored, and I can't figure out why. Is it because of the reason that my friend stated? Then there would be two girls?
My last requests would have to be, if you have an opinion that is not valid to the question, leave it to yourself, and don't argue if someone has a different opinion than you. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/12epqu/please_eli5_what_the_bible_has_to_say_about/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6ug8au",
"c6ugikp",
"c6ugj7u"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"A note on Lilith - she's not in the Bible itself but Talmudic texts and a lot of stuff about her was developed much later (like the Middle Ages).\n\nSort of like how many people's mental picture of Hell comes from *Paradise Lost* and *The Divine Comedy* rather than the Bible.",
"The Old Testament specifically says that \"men who lie with men as they do women\" are to be put to death.\n\nThe New Testament condemns homosexuality, but some believe it referred only to the man/teen relationships practiced by the Hellenistic Greeks.\n\nLilith is never mentioned in the bible. Her story as Adam's first wife dates to the Middle Ages, and is based loosely on female demons with a similar name from Arab mythology.",
"So, I'm no scholar, nor am I a particularly good Christian. I did ask my priest something related (How did \"An eye for an eye\" turn into \"turn the other cheek\"), and here's a summary of what he said: (Roman Catholic by the way)\n\nThe Old Testament is a sort of history, an explanation of where we came from, featuring the growth of the Jewish religion. Jesus built on that, and changed quite a few things. The basic fundamentals are still there (Almost exclusively the 10 commandments, very little of Jewish law carried over into Christianity), and the teachings of Jesus overwrites them, such as \"turn the other cheek\" and the teachings of the parables. \n\nNow, my take on your question:\n\nIn Leviticus (A book, by the way, I personally feel has very little to recommend it, in any way), it basically says homosexuality is wrong. (\"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.(Leviticus 18:22 KJV)\nIf a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them\")\n\n\nHowever, most moderate Christians I know of (Do note, this is mostly my Roman Catholic community) think that the teachings of Jesus overwrite this with \"Love each other\", and don't view it as a sin. What you mostly hear in the media is (In my opinion) a small group of fundamentalists who take the bible literally.\n\nEdit: I feel like the Fundamentalists and their views on homosexuals are to Christianity what extreme Muslims are to Islam, a small vocal group that people pay attention to."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3vlq7l | the science/marketing behind the "essential oils" craze | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vlq7l/eli5_the_sciencemarketing_behind_the_essential/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxomcgw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Can you clarify which \"craze\" you're talking about? I'm honestly not aware of any essential oil movement that would qualify as a \"crazy\", but I have seen essential oils marketed as everything from aromatherapy (which is bunk, but mostly harmless) to This Will Cure Cancer (which is *complete* bunk and (no pun intended) essentially snake-oil). \n\nBasically, there are *some* oils which will have specific, well-established effects. Peppermint oil on your skin *will* feel cool. Tea-tree oils *will* help with insect bites. But anything above rudimentary stuff like that, or someone saying \"it smells good\" has no scientific backing. \n\nAre you talking about a different craze? "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
46pl12 | how does a democracy work if the majority of individuals don't understand most of the basic concepts involved within their government? | So this might not have an exact scientific answer, but I figured I would ask this anyways. I'm strictly speaking about America right now.
I was thinking about our election that is about to come up in November, and this question popped into my mind. If you go around and ask people what the Senate and the House of Representatives do, there's a good chance that most will not know. Most people don't really have a good grip on how economics work in our government and routinely support individuals that promise legislation that would do more harm than good to our already enormous amounts of debt. There are other examples, but I don't want to make this a huge wall of text.
So if that's the case, how does our democracy work if a lot of our citizens don't understand critical concepts involved with making a sound decision for a presidential candidate? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/46pl12/eli5_how_does_a_democracy_work_if_the_majority_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"d06xmsk",
"d06xt0w",
"d06y15j"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"It doesn't work very well, really. You've just identified one of the major flaws with democracy, because not only does it mean that people generally won't make well-informed decisions, it means that politicians resort to strategies that boil down to marketing in order to make people believe them.\n\nThe fact is though, that regardless of how dysfunctional it has the potential to be, democracy still works a lot better than any other political system we've come up with.",
"Well technically speaking, the US, alongside practically all other modern countries around the globe, isn't a 'democracy' - it's a 'representative democracy'. Effectively, this means the electorate don't *need* to be knowledgable in politics and the economy to make the political scene 'work', as they elect people who (supposedly) are knowledgable in the aforementioned areas. Representative democracies allow for people to be somewhat engaged in politics in a semi-regular fashion, whilst not having to dedicate their lives to being 'politically aware' - people can just get on with their lives.\n\nAlso, I don't particularly think understanding how the House of Representatives and the Senate influences decision making when it comes to picking a president.",
"For one we are not a true democracy. \n\nWe are a federated republic, that uses democratic methods to elect the representatives that form the governing body. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1oro79 | trading share options | I've read the other ELI5s. Nope. still not grasping it.
If you could use a simple scenario involving two people (John and Jane) and a company called Imaginary Inc., and describe every possible situation that can go down in trading share options, I may get it.
For your effort, as I understand it's a bit long winded explanation, I'll happily provide you the glorious gift of gold to the best explanation.
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1oro79/eli5_trading_share_options/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccuwxqa"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Buying an option is putting a little bit of money up front, to fix the price you can buy(or sell) something at a future date.\n\n**Imaginary Inc (ticker IMI) is trading at $43**\n\nAn option has 4 parts. the **underlining asset**, **Strike**, **expiration date** and **Type** \n\nLets get rid of the simple ones first. \n* Underlining asset it the stock you are taking an option out on, in this case Imaginary Inc.\n* Expiration date^1 is when the option expires, you lose the option on the underlining asset.\n\nStrike and Price I will get into in the examples. An Option may look like this:\n\n**IMI Jun15 45 CALL** and trade for 1.10\none contract generally represents 100 shares of stock\n\nif sally seller writes (sells) this contract to bob buyer\n\n*Bob pays Sally $110, nonrefundable. $1.10 per share\n\n* Bob now has the right(has the choice) to buy 100 shares of IMI from Sally at $45 at or before June 15\n\n* Sally has the obligation to sell him 100 shares at $45.\n\n**ex 1:**On June 15 the price of IMI is $44. Bob has the right to buy 100 shares of IMI from Sally at $45. However, he can buy 100 shares from the market at a dollar less. so he would choose not to. The option expires. Sally has made the $110 and keeps ownership of the stock.\n\n**ex 2:**If however on June 15 the price of IMI is $47 Bob has the right to buy 100 shares of IMI from Sally at $45, and can sell those shares to the market at $47. Bob net executes the contract: the transactions is as follows. \n* Bob buys 100 shares of IMI from Sally at $45 for $4,500\n* Bob sells those same 100 shares to the market at 47 for $4,700\n\nFrom this bob made $90. the 200 in proceeds less the 110 he paid for the option. He avoided the downside risk of owning the stock, and capped his risk at the $110 he paid up front. (that was lost in the first scenario).\n\nSally owned the stock at $43 / share. She sold the stock at $45, she made $200 + the $110 she sold the option for. \n\nIn an option, the person who writes (sells) has an obligation, and the person who buys has a right.\n\nA Call, gives the buyer the right to take shares from the seller at the strike price. \n\n* you would sell a call if you thought the assist was not going to reach the strike price in the time period. (first example - Sally made an extra $110)\n* You would buy a call if you thought the price of the stock was going up (second example Bob made $90 and took very little downside risk or upfront capital - highly leveraged)\n\nA put gives the buyer a right to put shares on the seller at the strike price.\n\nIf bob has a $45 put, and the price dropped from $47 back to $41 per share. Bob could buy shares from the market at $41 and sell them to Sally at $45 making $4 per share. \n\nOptions are also trade-able. If a stock is at $41 and you buy a call with a strike of $45 that expires in 2 months. The next day the stock jumps to $44. You would not be able to make money executing the option. however the price someone would pay for the contract moves up, so you can sell the contract to someone else. Say you bought it for $1.10, you may be able to sell it for $1.40. This is because it is more likely to cross the strike price, and the option to buy is then worth more.\n\nHope this helps...Sorry for the rambles\n\n^1 There are two types of Expiration. American and European. An American style allows the buyer to call(or put) the option at anytime before or at expiration. in the European style the buyer can only take action at the expiration."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2chpcs | what is in cheese that often causes people to have crazy dreams or nightmares? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2chpcs/eli5_what_is_in_cheese_that_often_causes_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjfkwp9",
"cjfkx7h",
"cjfloep"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"What you are eating is either not cheese, or really old cheese with funny mold growing on it.",
"According to [this BBC article](_URL_0_), it doesn't.",
"Do you live in Colorado? Then it's the pot. Someone is putting the pot in your cheese."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120417-does-cheese-give-you-nightmares"
],
[]
] |
||
4u261i | how drinking alcohol causes cancer | Referring to this study: _URL_0_
As a side question, should people reduce their alcohol consumption or avoid it altogether? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4u261i/eli5_how_drinking_alcohol_causes_cancer/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5mffpz"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Just an additional comment - the mechanism by which the claim this article is making has not been established. In otherwords, we don't have a hard answer to the question \"How does alcohol cause cancer?\""
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jul/22/alcohol-direct-cause-seven-forms-of-cancer-study"
] | [
[]
] |
|
6zoxje | why are nfl players tearing acls and other ligaments more now than they did 20 years ago? | Perhaps I'm wrong as I'm only in my 30's, but I don't remember seeing so many players blow out their knees with non-contact injuries as I see now. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6zoxje/eli5_why_are_nfl_players_tearing_acls_and_other/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmww6zz",
"dmx9nyp"
],
"score": [
8,
3
],
"text": [
"The ACL is a major ligament when it comes to stabilizing the knee during deceleration. With the players being bigger, heavier and faster then the strain on this ligament is increased. Also the focus on head injuries tends to cause defenders to hit lower which ultimately means more leg injuries. ",
"Players are larger and faster than they used to be, but ligaments can't be improved.\n\nFurther, both college and pro players play more games in a season, increasing the chances of injury.\n\nFinally, there is bias at work here, because in the old days ligament damage could be a career ender. Gale Sayers never really recovered from his ligament damage and he would be historical footnote if he wasn't on pace to be one of the best players of all time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
41esxv | why aren't supplement manufacturers legally required to have their products evaluated by the fda? | Companies could flat out lie (which in all likelihood, they do already) about the benefits of their products and we'd never know it. Even worse, their products could cause long-term health issues and we'd never know it. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/41esxv/eli5_why_arent_supplement_manufacturers_legally/ | {
"a_id": [
"cz1rnfe",
"cz1trxz",
"cz25h88"
],
"score": [
6,
10,
4
],
"text": [
"Many supplement manufacturers are located in Utah and have donated heavily to Utah Senator Orrin Hatch. He has successfully fought any attempts at regulating the supplement industry",
"Because the FDA's ability to regulate supplements was severely neutered back in the 90s by the [\"Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994\"](_URL_0_)\n\n--edit--\n\nHowever, I will add that companies cannot make specific claims as to the benefits of their supplements, because that makes them a drug and therefore regulatable.",
"I think it's even worse than that. I've seen so many articles about studies done that conclude that a majority of the supplements don't even contain the ingredient on the label. \n\nHere's one I just found that showed that 80% of the ones tested didn't even contain trace amounts of anything they claimed to. \n _URL_0_\n\nI honestly don't know how it's legal. Think about it, if you sold canned vegetables and 80% of your product line contained just water instead of whatever vegetable was on the label surely you'd at least be in trouble for false advertising. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietary_Supplement_Health_and_Education_Act_of_1994"
],
[
"http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/gnc-target-walmart-walgreens-selling-bogus-herbal-supplements-ny-charges-020315.html"
]
] |
|
4m513q | why do we get so appalled when animals like harambe the gorilla and cecil the lion are killed, but still enjoy eating cows, chickens, lambs, and pigs every day? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4m513q/eli5_why_do_we_get_so_appalled_when_animals_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3smdgd",
"d3smr3h",
"d3smvul",
"d3sna8q",
"d3soynz",
"d3srl6e",
"d3st0si",
"d3std11"
],
"score": [
9,
20,
3,
6,
5,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Wish I could explain this, it's exactly why I'm vegan (not an angry vegan either just saying) \nI think everyone cares but it's hard to change habits. Our society is so far removed from what actually happens to the the animals that are eaten that it's hard to connect the meat in the grocery store to actual living animals.",
"i'm gonna venture a hypothesis that it has to do with psychological distance and \"humanization,\" for lack of a better word. \n\nPsychological distance is easy enough to understand: we don't have to watch the animals we eat grow up, and we don't have to personally slaughter them. Harambe on the other hand was a zoo animal that people visited and witnessed get killed. \n\nHumanization may be a process where we assign ethical value to the life of another species because 1) they're similar to us or 2) they please us. Gorillas are similar enough to us that we grant them some human-like dignity and rights. We respect them because we see bits of ourselves in them. We do not, however, relate as strongly to cows. Animals like dogs and what not are similar to us in the social way they interact with us. Plus they cute (it pleases us). \n\nSome people's moral worldviews are more expansive. Just like over time, people developed a \"humanistic\" worldview of morals centered around shared humanity, other people have developed a morality centered around life. I forget the name for this...",
"Because society has conditioned us to think some animals are cute and fluffy (okay, lions and gorillas ain't exactly cute and fluffy, but you take my meaning) and some are food.\n\nIt's why people go ape shit over other cultures eating cats and dogs. We're conditioned to think of them as pets, but really meat is just meat, eating one animal isn't a whole lot different to eating another.\n\nOf course, with lions and gorillas, they *are* endangered, so there is that factor, but a lot of it is down to the cute and fluffy aspect",
"1. People subjectively like certain animals, and don't care about, or actively dislike others. So, for example, people are sympathetic to cute baby seals, but are less sympathetic towards rats. Gorillas are relatively human-like so people may like them more than other animals.\n\n2. Gorillas are rare and endangered. Pigs, goats, sheep, cows, chickens, and other domestic animals are far from rare. They're bred in large numbers and aren't in danger of extinction like gorillas are.",
"People aren't appalled that the animals died -- they are appalled at how and why they died.\n\nScience and modern nutritional technology aside, people generally need to eat animals in order to live healthy lives. Vegetarianism and veganism are, for many, a luxury of the modern world built on the muscley backs of meat eaters.\n\nI love animals. They provide my stomach with delicious sustenance and, when convenient to me, my heart with love and joy.\n\nKilling animals for reasons like \"It was coming right at me!\" or \"I was hungry\" are justifiable, realistic reasons to kill an animal for me and many others because of the most basic instinct of self-preservation/survival.\n\nKilling animals for reasons like, \"A parent failed to competently raise/watch their child,\" or, \"Because it's fun to kill things,\" are not justifiable reasons for many people.\n\nSo what you're seeing with Harambe isn't a representation of how much people literally care about Harambe, the gorilla -- it's people being outraged with the reality that something had to die because of the poor decisions of a child. It's worth noting as well that the only justification people use that help to come to terms with this is the one I mentioned above (\"It's coming right for me!\"). Ultimately, we view it as better to kill the gorilla than risk a human child (one of our own fellow folks) getting harmed. Again... self-preservation is something we can identify with.\n\nWith Cecil... hunting for sport generally gets a bad wrap, though less-so when the kill is consumed. But Cecil was lured out of a safe-zone, shot, beheaded, and skinned. People have a hard time identifying with those activities.\n\nLet me use a different example...\n\nImagine Bob is attacked by a dog. The dog starts biting Bob. Then the dog turns to a child and leaps to maul it. Bob jumps between the dog and the child, grabs the dog by the neck, and punches it several times until the dog dies.\n\nTragic. Yet Bob is arguably a hero. We don't even care whether or not Bob enjoyed killing the dog -- we look at his actions as being necessary to avoid a consequence (imminent harm) that we can identify with.\n\nLet's change it up.\n\nBob is walking down the street and comes across a dog. Bob gets the sudden urge to tie a rope around its neck, hang it from a tree, and hit it with a stick.\n\nBob doesn't even kill the dog -- but Bob sure sounds like a monster. Why? Not because we don't believe in causing harm to animals -- but because we care about the circumstances and justifications for doing so. \n\nSo if Harambe or Cecil were killed reasons that we could relate to, then we wouldn't be appalled. But they weren't, so we are.",
"A large serving of cultural conditioning with a hefty side of cognitive dissonance can really screw with our rationality.",
"Because cows, chickens, sheep, and to a lesser extent pigs, are human inventions. We selectively bred them for thousands of years to be a good source of protein. Without domestication, those animals wouldn't exist in the form they do today, in fact most of those animals would struggle to exist in the wild at all without human assistance. Mastitis kills cows selectively bred to have large udders for milk production, parasites kill sheep bred to have unnaturally high quantities of wool They're like corn or broccoli or any other human modified organism. Their \"natural\" counterpart/anticendant is almost unrecognisable, if it still exists. Lions and gorrillas on the other hand, get on just fine without us. Better in fact. The problems for wild animals begin when we, because we need lots of space, start to encroach on their lifestyle. Because most people aren't farmers any more, when a lion is killed, it shocks us. We feel it's a tragic loss of a beautiful animal. If we were still farmers, we'd likely be less sympathetic toward the lion cause it kills our cows and can eat our family. People don't like having their family eaten. Cows probably don't like it that much either but, no one cares because we've been breeding them as produce for so long, what they want is invisible to most of us. ",
"Lions and Gorillas are endangered. We've destroyed them to the point where they need human made, or human protected area to survive. Cows, chickens and pigs are bbred to be eaten and the news doesn't show them being killed on TV. In our culture, even children associate food with chicken cows and pigs. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
42y0z1 | if someone were sleeping and you were to strike them in the head, would it be possible to "knock them out?" | I had a thought of whether or not someone would wake up after being struck in the head while asleep, or if they would stay unconscious. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42y0z1/eli5_if_someone_were_sleeping_and_you_were_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"czdx5q0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Sure, if you deliver a blow that renders the sleeping person unconscious (you monster) they are going to be unconscious. The unconsciousness from being knocked out isn't like the unconsciousness from being asleep, and doesn't necessarily let you be roused by an external stimuli (like the blow itself)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3r5f5d | why has nobody come to collect on the us debt? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3r5f5d/eli5why_has_nobody_come_to_collect_on_the_us_debt/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwl1bz1",
"cwl1d64"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"People collect on it every day. It's in the form of US bonds, not in some weird back alley mobster loan. Some of the bonds matured today and some will mature tomorrow and the next day and the next day forever. It's not just one big loan some guy can call in and ask for all his money back. ",
"People do continuously. You buy a bond from the government that that they agree to pay back in ten years. If a government is buying large amounts of debt and stops buying more, then the US could just raise the interest a little and sell more to others."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1p1x7l | why do we smile? most species show their teeth as a sign of aggression but we show ours in happiness. why? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1p1x7l/eli5_why_do_we_smile_most_species_show_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccxybc5",
"ccxyeah",
"ccxyl5j",
"ccxze1j",
"ccxzize",
"ccxzmt5",
"ccy0t0a",
"ccy1g7h",
"ccy1ld0",
"ccy7h12",
"ccy7kls",
"ccy7ssu",
"ccya1tk",
"ccybk6c",
"ccydh51",
"ccyi01b",
"ccyi1lx"
],
"score": [
13,
5,
342,
57,
2,
13,
36,
3,
30,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
8,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"\"Many biologists think the smile originated as a sign of fear. Primalogist Signe Preuschoft traces the smile back over 30 million years of evolution to a \"fear grin\" stemming from monkeys and apes who often used barely clenched teeth to portray to predators that they were harmless. The smile may have evolved differently among species and especially among humans.\" -wikipedia is your friend",
"I can't remember the source so this might be wrong, but I remember watching a video about some animal behaviorist or something where they explained this. Mammals show their teeth as a threat display, so we probably did this too as we evolved. Somewhere along the line it changed from \"I will hurt you with these teeth\" to \"I could hurt you with these teeth but I'm not going to - I'm showing you that although I could hurt you, I choose not to, so lets be friends.\"",
"A smile was first believed to be used to show fear (also known as a fear grin) from around 30 million years ago by our ancestors. This use of the smile is not too different from its use by apes who also can use their smile to show fear. The smile evolved over millions of years and differently through several animals, cultures, and through different social behaviours as an affect display to show happiness, pride, contempt, fear, anger, embarrassment, love, and several other combination of emotions.\n\nInteresting note: even humans who have been blind from birth will display correct emotions on their faces even though they've never actually seen the facial expressions down by others.\n*My degree is in communication and my interest is in non-verbal*",
"So, when I smile at my dog does he take it as a sign of aggression? ",
"Smiles can be very disarming.",
"Greyhounds smile, they show their teeth when excited.\n\nSource: Have owned a greyhound.",
"Teeth are not human's primary natural weapon, so it is less threatening. Our hands evolved to be perfect clubs, which is one reason we perceive raised hands as a threatening or violent gesture. ",
"I see a lot of comments about dogs smiling. I'd like to know more. ",
"Today in my psychology class my professor actually talked about this! I'm just pulling info from my notes, so no sources, but this might be relevant/fun facts.\n\nDifferent cultures have different acceptable ways of expressing emotion. For example, Americans tend to smile more than Germans, and Japanese tend to smile much more than Americans. This doesn't mean that the Japanese are inherently happier, just that their culture has taught them that smiling is expected. It is much more a cultural stigma than an emotional byproduct. \n\nAnother fun fact, women in all cultures smile significantly more often than men and the main reason for unconscious smiling (smiling without forcing it) in women is actually anxiety, not happiness. This can be related to how other animals \"smile\" when afraid or defensive. Smiling from happiness is most likely a learned trait that has been passed down from parents to children for a long enough time that it is now normal. ",
"One theory is that a smile is a leftover from aggressive facial expressions. Imagine a monkey (Jimmy) hearing rustling in a bush, it faces the bush and bears it's teeth in an aggressive way. Out of the bush come it's best buddy Bobo. Once Jimmy recognizes Bobo, his facial muscles relax a bit. Jimmy is still showing some teeth, but his lips aren't pulled back all the way so he doesn't look as aggressive. Over time, bearing your teeth a bit becomes it's own facial expression that starts to symbolism recognition and eventually happiness.",
"One theory says it is just a weak form of laughter, but that raises more questions. The most popular theory is similar to previous posts; that smiling can be used to show fear in Primates, which may be the origin. However, showing fear is a submissive gesture and may make us seem younger. Showing a submissive gesture consequently shows you are not a threat and so allows bonding and cooperation or less aggression from more dominant members of the group, which is evolutionarily adaptive. ",
"Am I the only one that doesn't smile with my teeth visible..?",
"So, if a mammal (monkey) shows it's teeth as a form of aggression what does it do to show happiness?\n",
"I don't know much about the biological side of things, but in terms of history I do know a toothy smile was considered crude in the low countries around the 17th century. You generally only smiled with your lips, unless you were a drunken uncouth peasant! I think in Victorian England this was the case, too. So in terms of showing teeth some of it may be cultural. ",
"I hope this doesn't get buried, as it is an interesting take on why we smile. It is covered relatively simply in [this] (_URL_0_) document. In very simple terms, we smile because evolutionarily when our ancestors were happy or something maked them pleased, they would be wise to show something that is the opposite of aggression, which is to vocalize something that makes the other, pleasing party feel superior. Think of it like this. Make an \"oo\" sound and spread your lips into a smile. Notice how the sound is heightened and might by seen as less intimidating? This is essentially the claim to the acoustic origin of the smile.\n",
"The dominant theory these days is that the smile did originate from the sign of aggression. For example, you see somebody approaching, bare your teeth, they get closer and you recognise them as a friend, the action stops midway and gets caught in a smile. The expression basically evolved from a mechanism that says \"Oh! Hey! It's you! Everything's alright!\". The smile is the \"we're all cool here, dude\" of evolved human expressions. ",
"We still have a fear smile. It shows up when we do things like riding a roller coaster or going through a haunted house. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~ohala/papers/smile.pdf"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
88rcsg | in the case of a deadly accident, how does the family of the deceased find out about it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/88rcsg/eli5_in_the_case_of_a_deadly_accident_how_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwmnpj8",
"dwmp9q6",
"dwmquy3",
"dwmrzjb",
"dwms1lf",
"dwmxo2i",
"dwmyoy5",
"dwn0ajs",
"dwn2ics",
"dwn2mxx",
"dwn3tov",
"dwn44as",
"dwn4a39",
"dwn55m6",
"dwn6bgn"
],
"score": [
62,
13,
7,
149,
5,
27,
5,
35,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"The police will investigate the identities of the victims. This can be done through identification found on them, the registration of the car, fingerprints, dental records, etc. Once they know who the person is, they will contact their family (called next of kin) and let them know what happened. ",
"When a family member passed in another state, the police department called my dad and informed him. They then ask a family member to come and identify the deceased. ",
"Generally it’s up to the Police. They’ll use the information available to identify the victims - registrations, contents of wallets, etc - and get in contact with the family. They then ask the family to identify the body. Sometimes they’re wrong, but they generally won’t invite someone if they’re not confident.\n\nA lot of times people come forward as well. They ring and report a person missing and if descriptions match they get invited in as well.",
"Good detective work. My wife's sister died in a motorcycle accident in Toronto, Canada. She'd changed her name, and had been largely estranged from her family for decades. There was no family in her home town anymore. My wife changed her name and we live a long way from their home town in the US.\n\nSomehow that Canadian detective figured out that my wife was the deceased's sister. He would have had to dig through many years of records, received help from police in Ontario, Texas, California and Utah to track down my wife.\n\nIt took about 8 hours before the police in our town rang our doorbell to give us the news.",
"The driver, at least, is usually carrying ID. The car itself usually has its own ID (license plate, VIN) which can be tied back to the owner, who is usually the driver, or at least provide some clue to the driver's identity if their own ID is missing. If they can identify just some people in the car (which is common), those people's family or friends can usually offer suggestions for who they might have been traveling with. With those suggestions, they can pull up photos from the state photo ID database and compare them to the bodies.",
"This is one of the lesser known responsibilities of law enforcement. I've seen officers remain with the family for 8+ hours, it can affect everyone involved. If the family lives outside the jurisdiction of where the fatality occurred, the police department will contact the city where the family lives and they will conduct the notifications.",
"Can confirm. Was just in a fatality accident, other driver passed away alone in their vehicle. Police used drivers license and vehicle registration to notify police in their city to go knock the door. Family could then request to speak to the officers at the scene. \n\nEdit: Also, as an aside, if your phone is unlocked they will apparently sometimes search for “mom” or other such names in your contacts as well if all else fails. Most people’s phones are locked now these days though so apparently that doesn’t happen very often. ",
"I had gotten into a near deadly accident about 4 years ago. It was up in the air if I was going to survive, as i was being airlifted to Mass General. Cops we're at my mothers house within an hour. Pretty much said get there asap because you might be saying goodbye. It's my 24th birthday today and i am happy to be alive. Never forget to be thankful for being alive. ",
"Just had this happen last weekend. My mom had an aneurysm in an airport bathroom. We got a call from a doctor after EMS brought her to the hospital. Took probably an hour and were not sure if us calling her cell phone had anything to do with them knowing to call us as they called back from her cell phone. ",
"Thanks for asking. I worry about this frequently because I live alone and have pets. I have huge water and food bowls so they'll be okay for a few days if I vanished. ",
"It's the police's responsibility (in the US, anyway) to determine the identity of the victim and inform next of kin. In most cases, this can easily be determined from ID the victim was carrying at the time, or their vehicle's tags (which are connected to a database of vehicle owners' info that police frequently access for various purposes). The victim's phone is also a potentially easy source of ID. In my experience, a lot of people carry medications in their pharmacy-issued bottles, which also have their name on them. I'm an EMT and have responded to a lot of vehicle accidents--it's rarely difficult to determine the victim's identity, even if they're unresponsive.",
"In the US the local police come to the home of the immediate 'Next of Kin\" and notify them in person. They keep going down the list of \"last known address\" until they find them If the accident happened in another state some states require that the State Police make the notification, others still allow the local police or Sheriffs Department to do it!\n\nThey prefer not to do it at the person's workplace, but if that's where they find them, they will either ask them to come outside and either stand next to the police car or if the weather is bad or there is just no privacy they might have them get in the police car\n\nIf the person was on active duty in the military, even if they were not on duty at the time it's two people from their service in full dress uniforms.\n\nInforming the other relatives is generally up to the next of kin\n\nIn Canada it is usually but not always the RCMP in one of the few situations where you will see their red unis on the street.",
"Worth remembering that if they *can't* find out who you are easily, your loved ones will eventually report you missing, at which point they can put two and two together. ",
"Sometimes the family has to do the investigating. I know a girl who's mum and dad died in a car crash on holiday, whilst they were on their way to the airport to come home. The first she knew about it was when her boyfriend went to collect them from the airport, and they simply weren't on the plane. It took another 6 hours of ringing hotels, airlines and hire car companies to find out what had happened.",
"1). Run the plate/registration of the car\n2). Check wallets/purses\n3). If anything comes from step 2, talk to their relatives, go to their last known address etc...\n4). PDs will contact other departments that our in other cities to notify people.\n4A). Never is supposed to be over the phone\n4B). Supposed to have cops/detectives their to share the news.\n\nIf someone is dead at the hospital, then phone calls can be made saying something like, “Your son was in a very serious accident and we need you to get to the hospital as soon as you can.” (Or something like that).\n\n5). Death notification is absolutely the worst part of the job. Luckily if it is at the hospital the Chaplin and/or docs will speak to the relatives.\n\nFingerprints scan can also quickly tell you the persons identification if they have already been locked up before.\n\nIn some cases they are a “Jon Doe” and aren’t identified until down the line when someone reports their out of state relative or friend missing and the connection is made.\n\nSome are never known...."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8hew47 | if corn comes out undigested, is there any reason to eat it? do you get any nutrients? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8hew47/eli5_if_corn_comes_out_undigested_is_there_any/ | {
"a_id": [
"dyj7svx",
"dyj7szo",
"dyj80g0",
"dyj8stz"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
16,
2
],
"text": [
"What you are passing is the hull or shell of the corn kernel. The inside of the kernel is digested and contains a large amount of natural sugar amongst other nutrients.",
"Corn doesn't come out undigested, only the shells do. We crush and tear the shells with our teeth so that we can digest what's inside the kernels. ",
"Shells are full of poop when they come out. Don't re-eat them thinking it's free food because it's not digested",
"Corn is very starchy I believe, humans can digest starch with salivary amylase so it doesn't come out undigested.\n\nHumans can't digest cellulose (plant \"fiber\"). Plants certainly have some mineral content but fiber is also an important part of creating soft feces that can export waste from the body."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6vqi8j | how does someone source a history book? what's to stop me writing a book about history and making it all up? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6vqi8j/eli5how_does_someone_source_a_history_book_whats/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm25i4l",
"dm25i7y",
"dm25j22",
"dm28cbf",
"dm28qfg",
"dm28z6a",
"dm29ck0",
"dm29f4n",
"dm29kyl",
"dm29sx3",
"dm2fh0r",
"dm2hpns",
"dm2qmos",
"dm30g1h"
],
"score": [
5,
92,
14,
99,
2,
2,
3,
12,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Ever hear of primary sources?",
"You would source documents and records of the time as well as statements from people who were alive at that time. Just because it happened some time in the past doesn't make the writing exempt from needing reliable and accurate sources in order to back up its claims.",
"How do you believe any source of information, even one based on objective observations? \n\nAuthority is the answer. Every field has tested and trusted leaders. These leaders criticize and accept. They are editors on trusted journals and books.\n\nAuthority can even be measured. In academic publishing, the \"impact factor\" of a journal is a measure of how many times, on average, each article has historically been cited. This tells you how much weight people in the field give the journal. The editors on high impact journals are thus more trusted than the editors on lower ranked journals. ",
"Historian here: \n\nThere are two types of sources: Primary and Secondary. The main pieces of evidence and (secondary) the people writing about the main pieces of evidence. \n\nSometimes they do just make it up! A historian's job is not just to know random dates and people but to interpret the evidence, and this includes looking at someone from thousands of years ago and saying \"you know what, this guy is lying.\" \n\nGranted, you need to have a strong argument based on other pieces of evidence. Plutarch is an example that I often come across. Plutarch can be super helpful, he is a pretty good academic, is well read, and for the most part does a decent job of giving the basic facts.... but he absolutely loves drama. He will add in drama whenever he possibly can. In his work on Alexander he basically says he's not a historian but one showing the virtue of these figures. \n\nSo occasionally we'll get a story from Plutarch that appears nowhere else. Plutarch is known for being someone who studied the other historians well, and we only have a handful of these historians' works still in existence, so we have to rely on people like Plutarch to tell us what was in them. So we have to go \"hmm, IS THIS PLAUSIBLE?\" If so, we need to look at the evidence, compare what we do know, and make an argument. Somethings we can eliminate instantly. For example, Plutarch says Themistocles and Aristides got into a debate after the Battle of Salamis about how to proceed. Plutarch spent a lot of time hyping up the rivalry between Themistocles and Aristides, so this fits right in.... but Herodotus, who was alive during the actual time of this period, makes it very clear that Aristides was not involved in this debate at all and it was the Spartan Eurybiades instead. But Plutarch changed this one small fact for drama. \n\nSo when Plutarch then creates more drama between Themistocles and Aristides by saying Themistocles told Aristides he wanted to destroy the allied fleet, but told no one but Artistides, we can say \"Wow, that's a huge accusation, but it probably didn't happen..\" there's no evidence elsewhere of it, there's no reason that this would support Themistocles' plans, or help Athens in any way (they already had hegemonic control by a lot) and why would he tell his arch nemesis of this evil plan? So in this case it's not just Plutarch changing some basic facts but he's outright lying to progress the story along to explain why Themistocles suddenly fell from grace and was chased out of Athens. \n\nNow if we look at Secondary Sources: Especially modern ones, there are a lot of ones that outright lie... in fact there's a gigantic market for them -- we call them \"Popular History\" which are history books written for the public instead of academics. Pretty much anytime you see a news story \"Was __________ secretly gay?\" etc., this is popular history. If you go to your local book store, your history section is 90% popular history -- these books can't be used in proper research articles. One of the ways they get away with it is they don't actually cite any sources. There's no way to follow their evidence and check for yourself -- they do this purposefully. \n\nWith actual historians we are required to show our work, to cite our references, and if this was a proper article I would have shown the exact passages in Plutarch and Herodotus that you would find these changes (and if anyone really wants to know I can dig them up in the morning, but honestly right now I can't be fucked.) \n\nBut if I did post them and did cite them and they were wrong it opens up the door for someone to go \"Uh, DemDerDemDen is wrong, and here's why, based on this evidence...\" and I might reply with other evidence defending my position, but this sort of peer review keeps things honest (albeit bloody ;) ) \n\nI hope I'm making sense, let me know if you have any questions. ",
"If you think of myths like Napoleon being small or Columbus discovering that the earth was round, without proper sources like scientific publications a history book can in fact end up full of lies.",
"Reiterated stories, especially ones that have gone through so many levels (person down to person down to person), are bound to change. ",
"Think of it like a more serious and reputable reddit. If people (or reputable experts in your case) like and agree with what you write you will gain upvotes. If you gain enough upvotes you will reach a bigger audience (publication, marketing etc.). Basically you have to trust in the opinions of your audience or, through whatever means you deem necessary, force them to believe what you wrote.\n",
"No one seems to be actually answering the question posed. In reality there's nothing to stop you, in most countries, making it all up and there have been books that have rewritten history. Unless there's a law and some sort of review process, there's generally nothing to stop someone writing something that's false.\n\nThere's a large gap between writing that book and people accepting it though. The book probably wouldn't sell well and if it did, it'd attract enough attention for scholars to notice that it'd been invented and discredit that book. They would be citing the lack of sources or pointing out that the sources contradict the claims made in the book.",
"You use other history books to source your history book. The information in those books is trustworthy, because they've been sourced from other history books that have been sourced from previous history books that... Well, you get the point.",
"Real talk, I see books which cite other books that are a century old, which in turn make claims about ancient history. I sit here, reading it, realising they could be lying or completely wrong, and people will still use it as a primary eource",
"If a history book does not source primary or secondary sources, you ought to stop reading it as a source of information, and start reading it as a book of fiction.\n\nClaims that don't rest on sources are no more than shouts that say \"it's true!\" and rest on \"because it really is!\"",
"In your scenario, the only thing stopping you would be your editor or publisher.\nIf you're self publishing, then there's nothing to stop you. However, over time actual historians will point out all of the unsourced material, and your book will lose credibity. Whether that trickles down to the general public is anyone's guess.",
"In the 1970s when newspapers were past their peak but still pretty universal Ben Bradley, then Managing Editor of the Washington Post \nsaid \"One of the rolls of the newspaper is to be the first rough draft of the next history text book.\"\n\nLike it or not it's true. In the public library go to the microfilm room and bring up your local newspaper from the day you were born. \n\nThen do the same from the day your same gender parent was born Then look at the history text book you used last school year, You'll see what he means",
"No publisher will publish that book for you. Nothing is stopping you from self publishing a book but it won't sell and you will get very mean reviews. It will be considered historical fiction too I'm sure."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6egitz | the recent supreme court ruling regarding patent rights and it's implications. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6egitz/eli5_the_recent_supreme_court_ruling_regarding/ | {
"a_id": [
"dia60do",
"diaan6u"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"So this specific case revolves around Lexmark. Their argument was that because they had a patent on their ink cartridges that they could bar other people from profiting off those ink cartridges in the 'after market' (the after market meaning after you buy it from the store). There are many places that will refill the cartridge for you at much cheaper rates than Lexmark will, obviously Lexmark wants you to go through them to make more money. \n\nThe implications are pretty good. Let's talk about what could've happened had it been ruled the other way first. Essentially Lexmark could have dictated how you fix or refill this cartridge that you bought. This could easily get extended out to other products, imagine buying a car and only being allowed to legally bring it to the manufacture to fix it, or buying an iPhone and only being allowed to go to Apple to have it fixed. This could even further extend to companies having even more control of how you use a product you bought. \n\nSince it didn't happen essentially it allows more competition in the after market, which is always good for consumers. It bars companies from preventing you from going to other companies to fix something you already bought. It's your property now companies should have no say in how you use it. ",
"There were two cases, really.\n\nWith the *Lexmark* case, the Supreme Court ruled that a patent holder's rights in a particular object are \"exhausted,\" i.e., completely and totally eliminated, when it is sold. This does not affect the patent holder's rights in the patent itself, so a buyer can't reverse-engineer a product any more than it could before. But patents also protect rights like distribution, import, export, etc., which have to do with the movement of patented *goods*, not the use of patented methods/processes/etc. to *manufacture* new goods. It is those rights which are \"exhausted\" upon an item's first sale.\n\nWith the *TC Heartland* case, the Supreme Court ruled that a patent case may only be brought where the *defendant* is incorporated or has its principal place of business. This will bring an end to the practice of patent trolls bringing most of their cases in the Eastern District of Texas, which for whatever reason is ridiculously patent-friendly. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1dwch0 | the "raw" mode in cameras | What exactly does it do differently.
What is all the fuss about it.
And how is editing a raw file in post better than a jpg file? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dwch0/the_raw_mode_in_cameras/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9uh4da"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Image formats like .jpg are compressed and this causes loss of data. You don't want a camera to capture data and then immediately throw it out. The RAW format gives you just what the image sensor sees, unaltered and unadulterated."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
9xzvfi | how does even the smallest amount of cream/milk in coffee eliminate the bitterness? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9xzvfi/eli5_how_does_even_the_smallest_amount_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"e9wtka3"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because the fat in the cream/milk chelates caffeine and other aromatic compounds. i.e. caffeine and other particles stick to the fat particles, so the former are not fully available to your taste buds hence the decreased bitterness."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3mvnd8 | how is it we can get dizzy/nauseous from viewing images | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mvnd8/eli5_how_is_it_we_can_get_dizzynauseous_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"cviimcw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Your eyes are perceiving that your body should be in one position (lying down in case of the linked gif), yet the signal from the balance centers in your ears are sending a different signal to your brain. This dissonance causes your brain to try and make you feel how you should based on the signal from your eyes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
f9k7zl | how does mental momentum work in sports. how is it that a team can go on a “run” and what is the explanation behind the mental processes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f9k7zl/eli5_how_does_mental_momentum_work_in_sports_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"fis3h1r",
"fis63tu",
"fisg80e",
"fiw63ag"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"What sports are you familiar with?",
"When things are going right you get into a flow. When things start going wrong, you start hyper focusing on the pitfalls which causes you to make more careless mistakes that further drive your success down. \n\nThis last super bowl was a really good example of how quickly this can change. The Kansas City QB had all this pressure on him of people expecting so much. And he was doing ok until he threw an interception. Then another and couple sacks later they're almost guaranteed to lose. Then he throws a perfect hail mary and suddenly the kid is on fire. With that hail mary he fell back into the flow of what he does and stopped worrying about how he had been playing like a total amateur. \n\nFalling into that flow is basically just remembering that you don't have to think about how to throw a ball. You just throw it perfectly because you've thrown it a 100,000 times before.",
"Refs help a lot with that in basketball atleast. You get rewarded for being the more aggressive team. So when you go on a \"run\" you're more likely to get favorable calls.",
"There’s actually something called the winner and loser effect in the study of animal behavior, which pretty much states that a victory in an aggressive encounter makes future victories more likely and vice versa. It depends on how winning or losing influences hormone levels, particularly stress hormones like cortisol. The winner effect or the loser effect (there is little to no evidence of them working in tandem) is partially responsible for the creation and maintenance of linear dominance hierarchies, which I suppose can be considered analogous to the rankings of top teams in sports as their season progresses."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
283yeq | despite decades of international aid and intervention, why is sub-saharan africa still portrayed as being such a mess? and is it the mess we're told it is? | Cheers for the insightful and edifying responses y'all. I appreciate it. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/283yeq/eli5_despite_decades_of_international_aid_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci76jn8",
"ci775ev",
"ci77z8z",
"ci786bd",
"ci7ax3n",
"ci7cals"
],
"score": [
2,
12,
6,
11,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"So much aid is stolen by corrupt governments that very little actually gets to the people who need it. There are some very rich African warlords.",
"You show up with a truck full of food, clean water, medicines to help 1000 people. 10 guys show up with machine guns and take the whole truck away.",
"Parts of it are a mess, but there has also been incredible progress. Take a look at this: _URL_0_\n",
"It's late, I'm on mobile, so I might have to expand on this later OP. \n\nIn short, you have a couple major problems. \n\n\n- a harsh climate not suited to the subsistence farming most of the people rely on to feed themselves\n\n\n- a lack of wide spread and maintained infrastructure like well-built roads, electricity, and plumbing to transport food, water, and other goods to support a growing economy\n\n\n- a lack of widespread education reinforced by the flight of human capital (read brain drain) to other more developed countries\n\n- diverse ethnic groups all in conflict since many of the new governments that emerged from colonial control degenerated into military, single party, or other forms of authoritarian rule. Many faced bloody civil wars when antagonisms between ethnic groups that colonial powers had forced to live together came to political surface. Regional conflicts turned into proxy battles between superpowers. Basically, In many former colonies, ethnic, religious, linguistic, and racial tensions disrupted political life and eroded what little sense of national identification and commitment had been built during the years before independence. \n\n- corrupt government resulting from high-stakes politics, (the fear that an ethnic group who wins power in the government will use that power to suppress neighboring ethnic groups) underpayed civil servants, and patron client systems (called chop chop politics regionally)\n\nTL:DR - bad climate plus post colonial problems such as ethnically driven violence and government corruption result in cyclic endemic and widespread poverty. ",
"Part of the problem is the aid in an of itself. If one nation were to give another nation a lot of free food it could wind up crashing the agriculture market which could be the biggest sector in that economy. Instead of helping a few people you've now destroyed their economy by putting many farmers out of work. ",
"If you want to actually help Africa remember \"Trade, not aid\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://youtu.be/OwII-dwh-bk"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
30jj9m | can you lose your sense of smell? | I have noticed that I haven't been able to smell anything in the past couple of days.
I noticed it when they painted our classroom and everyone was saying how bad it smells and I didn't smell a thing so I started seeing if that was the only thing. But as close as I get to a food or drink I can't smell a thing.
I don't get allergies and my nose is not stopped up at all.
Can someone just explain if this is a temporary thing or if it's gone and if so what am I experiencing? I'm just confused. Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30jj9m/eli5_can_you_lose_your_sense_of_smell/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpt0hsv"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"You can lose the sense of small; it's called *anosmia.*\n\nFrom what I know, it's often caused by inflammation or other trouble in the nose area. This is usually temporary. It can also be caused by damage to the brain, which is usually more permanent.\n\nIf you really can't smell anything and there's no obvious reason, it's worth going to the doctor. But if you haven't taken any knocks to the head lately or anything, it's most likely a temporary thing.\n\nI should add that I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who once had olfactory inflammation and lost his sense of smell for a few days.\n\nEDIT: It's definitely smEll, not smAll, but I'm leaving it up, because I'm wild like that."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5r4wg5 | how does relaxed immigration policies affect an economy? | What are the economic benefits or disadvantages of having strict immigration policies? I've only heard of/ read about xenophobic reasons for having strict policies, but I feel there is an implied belief that it benefits a country economically to have strict borders - I've never read about how or why though. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5r4wg5/eli5_how_does_relaxed_immigration_policies_affect/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd4gac6",
"dd4j6lb"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It definitely benefits a country to have secure borders.\n\nUnregulated borders means a nation is unable to tax imports or control the entry of dangerous goods - guns, prohibited drugs, forgeries and piracies that violate intellectual property rules. A secure border is key to controlling these things.\n\nAs for immigration, control is still important. People should be vetted and examined before they are allowed into your country. Think about the classic movie trope: \"once I get to Mexico I'm free and clear.\" You think Mexico wants American criminals? No.\n\nSo. An open border is disastrous. A completely sealed border is equally disastrous. Many immigrants are not refugees, remember. Many are highly educated or experienced workers and specialists, who fill important gaps in the country's workforce.\n\nIn the case of North America, declining birthrates further increase the need for immigration.\n\nThere must be a balance. \n\nEdit: heh 'birders.'",
"America had some pretty \"open\" borders for a long time, led to the biggest economic and most powerful country to ever exist, North Korea has closed borders and is basically a famine state. I understand that it is more complex then that but immigration is generally beneficial to a countries economy."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1oa9il | why does my leg itch when i remove my high socks? | Why do my legs itch whenever I remove my dress socks or athletic high socks? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1oa9il/eli5_why_does_my_leg_itch_when_i_remove_my_high/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccq6w5p"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I have always found that my legs itch in that situation when my skin is too dry... using a moisturizer helps me."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2pyx33 | what causes yellow armpit stains | Since my teenage days I've always worn undershirts (because they feel good) to prevent my clothing from getting stained.
**Questions:**
* Is this caused by a particular reaction of sweat to deodorant/antiperspirant or the laundry detergent I wash my clothes in?
* Is there a certain fabric that doesn't get stained by pits? (cotton for sure gets stained)
* can trimming or shaving armpit hair cause less stains?
This was asked previously here- > [ELI5:Why do we get pit stains?](_URL_0_) but not a good answer was given. *From this post I also raise questions:*
* If its a milky substance that we sweat, why does it turn yellow? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pyx33/eli5_what_causes_yellow_armpit_stains/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn19eym",
"cn19fa4",
"cn1d3iw"
],
"score": [
3,
8,
5
],
"text": [
"It might not be the only factor but your deodorant could definitely be a reason. I used to get faint stains in my pits but since I changed to a deodorant that says on the bottle that it doesn't stain clothes I haven't had that problem.",
"Your body reacts to the aluminum in your deodorant/anti-antiperspirant. The combo of the two leaves yellow stains.\n\nNo idea on the other two.\n\nETA: you could try some deodorant that doesn't have aluminum (the kind of hippy natural kind, I guess?) which might eliminate it. You could try a stronger antiperspirant like certain-dri, with the idea that not sweating - > no pit stains",
"Its the deodorant's fault. I use Stanhexidine as a body wash, its an anti bacterial wash similar to stuff they use in hospitals. No longer use deodorant as the wash kills the bacteria that cause bad odor, and no pit stains anymore!"
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mnvbz/eli5_why_do_we_get_pit_stains/"
] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
j3tra | can someone explain to me what exactly went down during 9/11 like i'm 5? | I feel so un-American by not exactly knowing, but I was only 6 at the time, so I didn't really understand what happened, and I've never actually thought about what happened during 9/11 before. What was the motive behind the attack? Why the World Trade Center? What was the significance of the WTC? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j3tra/can_someone_explain_to_me_what_exactly_went_down/ | {
"a_id": [
"c28wp1t",
"c28wtze",
"c28yks0"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"On 9/11, people from a terrorist group hijacked four planes in order to crash them into important buildings. Two went into the twin WTC towers. One went into the Pentagon. The last crashed in PA because the passengers found out what happened and heroically fought back and brought the plane down before they could hit their target.\n\n*Why the target:* The World Trade Center towers were two of the tallest buildings in the entire country (though there are taller ones), and they were in the biggest city in the USA. Many large and influential companies had headquarters or offices in the WTC. Remember that they're terrorists, which means that they want to make people scared. The Pentagon is obvious.\n\n*Motive:* This is a little harder. al Qaeda, the terrorist group who claimed responsibility for the attack, has had a long standing problem with the US. There are a lot of reasons for this. I suppose one of the biggest is that we are a pluralistic society - we accept all kinds of people, generally - and they do not. They follow a very strict version of their religion, Islam, and it's pretty limiting. They believe that they should destroy anyone who doesn't think and act like them.\n\nThis is really generic, but I'm supposed to do it like you're five! ",
"Wow. Makes me feel old. It still seems so recent. \nNow, my perspective may vary from what you expect as I'm not American (Australian) but im going to try keep too much opinion out of it.\n\nAl Qaeda, an islamic terrorist group doesn't like the USA. They really US military being in Saudi Arabia (location of Mecca, sacred site to muslims)\nThey also really didnt like the way the USA supported Israel.\n\nNow, this group liked to attack things owned by America, such as ships and embassys etc. And, the World Trade Centre in New York.\nBig tall buildings, tallest in the world and considered a major landmark and symbol of 'the american empire'.\n\nThey set off a bomb in the basement once...\n\nThe CIA or someone told George W Bush that this group needed be to watched out for... but he didnt do a lot about it.\n\nThen one day a bunch of these muslim dudes who were working for Al Qaeda, after taking flying lessons and stuff. All got on planes in the USA.\n\nUsing box cutters as weapons they hijacked these planes, and took over the controls.\nOne of the planes flew into one of the twin World Trade Centre Towers.\nEveryone is watching in TV, the news etc. Wondering if it was an accident.\n\nThen another one flew into the second tower.\n\nHoly crap!! That aint no accident, America is Under Attack!!\n\nThen another one flew into the Pentagon.\n\nAt this point, everyone freaks out wondering out how many there could be.\n\nA fourth plane crashes into a field. The official story is that the passengers fought back once they found out about the other plane crashes and figured they were going to die anyway, so what's to lose in fighting back. (prior to this plane hijackings usually ended with the plane landing somewhere and the hijackers making demands or speeches)\n\nSo after it burns a while, with horrendous footage of people jumping to their doom to escape fire, one of the towers collapses. Then the other one does.\n\nLots of people die, but not as many as everyone at first feared.\n\nThen the USA attacks Afghanistan.\n\nThen later, for some inexplicable reason (well not inexplicable, but lets not get into that here) they also invade iraq.\n\nAnd it was almost like 10 years+ of living on bizzarro earth from then on...\n\nWay way over simplified, but, hey its the 'for a 5 year old' version.\n\nLet's also not even get into the whole, Russia invaded Afghanistan and the USA gave all these weapons and training to people like Bin Laden etc.\n",
"I don't think anyone has quite hit the nail on the head here so I'll try:\n\nIslamic terrorist group Al Qaeda was behind the 9/11 attacks. They had been at war with America for some time.\n\nThey hate America for many reasons, some regarding our \"way of life\" and others more directly motivated by specific American foreign policy actions.\n\nIn the 1980's, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. The US was committed to fighting the soviets on all fronts, because communism is a threat to capitalism and there can really only be one global economic system. Because of mutually assured destruction (due to atomic weapons) the US could not engage the soviets directly in Afghanistan, as that would result in nuclear war.\n\nInstead, the US opted to finance, arm and supply a group of afghan mallitias (basically ragtag armies) to fight to soviets for them in a \"proxy war\"\n\nThey were very successful and unexpectedly drove the Russians out of Afghanistan. Al Queda leader Osama bin Laden was one of the Afghan leaders at that time. So were many other members of Al Queda. \n\nAfter the war was over, the US essentially bailed on the situation, leaving Afghanistan to fend for itself. Osama bin Laden essentially felt like he and his army were used and my understanding is, that for him at least, this was the beginning of his true hatred for the US.\n\nHowever, even prior to the war, Islamic extremists such os Al Queda and Osama had beef with the US. They do not recognize the right of Isreal to exist and the US is a big supporter of Isreal. As far as most Muslims are concerned, that land was stolen from Palestinians/Muslims and given to the Jews afer ww2.\n\nThe US, of course, supports Isreal mostly due to economic and cultural ties. Isreal is a modern, western, capitalistic democracy and the US considers them to be their strongest ally in the region - despite the fact that the mere support of their existence causes them more problems than they would otherwise have in the middle east.\n\nThere were many wars between Islamic states an Isreal since isreal's creation in 1948, and the members of Al Queda support the Islamic states unconditionally. \n\nThere are other actions too, in Iran, Iraq etc. where the US has been on the wrong side with the Musims. Through the US's committed support and protection of Isreal, it's alienated itself from \"hardline\" muslims in the middle east.\n\nFinnally, we,ve got the serious culture problems. Al Queda, the Taliban, Hamas and etc are all very serious about their religion. As with most 1000+ year old holy books, the qua ran (their bible) has some pretty strict rules about beards, women, food, etc.\n\nEssentially, these groups say their entire life is 100% committed to Allah (their god) and they live their life accordingly.\n\nAccording to their strict intpretation of their holy laws, they see their mission in life as to convert the world to Islam, create one big Islamic state and crush the enemies of Islam.\n\nThey consider Christians to be charlatans and are disgusted by our \"amoral\" \"modern\" way of life.\n\nSo like with the communists, the US has been at war with the Muslim extremists for some time, as both have vast different world views and seemingly cannot both inhabit the same planet peacefully.\n\nTherefore, Al Queda attacked America on 9/11 by flying planes into the twin towers, which were two big important symbolic buildings of American capitalism. The also attacked the pentagon and failed to get to the white house.\n\nWe considered it unprovoked, the considered it retaliation for all the shit in the middle east up to then."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
26wx6h | put soda pop in freezer, ice chain reaction starts when i open it. | I have a 16.9 oz Mountain Dew Voltage. I opened it took a tiny sip, squeezed the air out of the bottle and put it in the freezer. 2 hours later I got it out, and it was liquid. When I opened the lid however, Ice started forming and 'grew' all the way down the bottle. I've never seen this happen before! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26wx6h/eli5_put_soda_pop_in_freezer_ice_chain_reaction/ | {
"a_id": [
"chv8ot5",
"chva7fy"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"What happens is the pressure that the CO2 builds up when the bottle is sealed prevents it from freezing (more accurately, it would need to get a lot colder before it freezes inside the container) but it is well below freezing temperature. If you time it just right when you open a supercooled soda, you can pour it out slurpee-style into a dish.",
"It's not about pressure nor freezing point depression. You don't need neither of them to snap freeze distilled water.\n\nIt has to do with the way ice forms, water molecules get linked together in a crystal (that's more or less why water expands when freezing, btw).\n\nThis happens when water is already under the freezing point (supercooled), but as it was left very still and probably lack impurities that are suitable as crystallization points, crystallization didn't start. \n\nWhen you shake it a bit, the energy you input triggers the crystallization process.\n\n_URL_2_\n\nAn analogous process happens with supersaturated solutions. If you don't have impurities and leave the solution very still, you can have more solute than you should be able to. But if you shake it, or introduce some impurity, all the excess will crystallize and fall immediately.\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLq5NibwV5g",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSGvy2FPfCw",
"https://www.physics.purdue.edu/outreach/young_scientists/sciencefair2008/ResearchPaper.pdf"
]
] |
|
344tjc | can life we haven't yet found, perhaps extraterrestrial, be made up of something other than dna and cells? | Or does life in any form require DNA? Or is it not possible to know yet? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/344tjc/eli5_can_life_we_havent_yet_found_perhaps/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqr9s0y",
"cqr9w03",
"cqr9z17",
"cqra874",
"cqre7vf",
"cqrhpg2",
"cqrjy4m",
"cqrn515",
"cqrsbem",
"cqru932",
"cqseybw"
],
"score": [
10,
174,
29,
4,
3,
2,
6,
2,
3,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"We don't really know if it's possible, because we haven't definitely found extraterrestrial life yet. Even if we did, and they used DNA, it doesn't mean all life everywhere *has* to use DNA. We would have to check the entire universe to prove that which just isn't possible.\n\nIf extraterrestrial life were to use something like DNA, it might not even look anything like ours. DNA has molecules four main base pairs (AGTC), which are the molecules that make up the \"code,\" like ones and zeros. It's entirely possible that life in a different environment could have different base pairs while still having something that might be recognizable as DNA, so instead of ones and zeros it's twos and threes. There is still a code but the machine that reads one can't interpret the other. [People have made synthetic DNA with base pairs not found in nature.](_URL_0_)\n\nIt's a bit harder to get around without cells because they keep all the molecular machinery together and can regulate its environment. A cell is the natural progression from a [micelle](_URL_1_), which occur naturally. That's not to say that life without some kind of cells is impossible.",
"Life as we know it requires several things, including the ability to use energy, replicate, grow, etc. \n\nDNA (and RNA) are the only information encoding molecules known to us, but some proteins can perform self replication directly without needing DNA/RNA and hypothetical cell *ancestors* could have existed long before DNA (replicating lipid bubbles are one such theory). Complex life will likely need something to act as information storage and replication but it doesn't have to be DNA. RNA itself is interestign because given sufficient peptides RNA can replicate all by itself without all the extra baggage of a \"cell\"\n\nNon-DNA based life is only theoretical at this point, but there is no reason all of the requirements for life \"as we know it\" could not be met with some sort of crystaline, sulphorous, ammonia, or who knows what else.",
"All life on Earth is descendent of a common ancestor that happened to use DNA to replicate itself. Alternatives to DNA have been proposed, including xenonucleic acids (XNA), some of which are hypothesised to have similar functional properties to DNA. In fact, on a planet with an acidic solvent, it's possible that life might evolve without making use of proteins, which would denature in the acid, and would require an entirely distinct method of replication. \n\nA question I tend to wonder about is what would happen if we stumbled on life on other planets in our solar system that also used the GATC base-pairs. Would this give weight to the panspermia hypothesis?",
"Asking these questions makes me want to ask \"What is life?\". If live is answering intelligably to a question, or movement, or \"being able to independantly replicate\", you will get different things in the list you may not have considered before to be life. ",
"Difficult to say.\n\nI've heard, for example, that the only other molecule we could base life on (theoretically) is silicon. Whether silicon-based life forms exist anywhere in the universe is anybody's guess but if it does it almost certainly wouldn't use DNA as we know it.\n\nAt the same time, I've always wondered why it's just assumed that any extraterrestrial life would use DNA in the first place. Is this simply a natural progression where life formation is concerned ? Couldn't there be some other method of storing information ? \n\nFrankly, I don't know enough about DNA to speculate too much beyond the rudimentary but I'd also like to know why we assume all life in the universe must use DNA as a means of passing and storing information.",
"There are three levels of extraterrestrial life that we can basically think of: life like us, life analogous to us, and life unlike us.\n\nLife like us would be the types of life that use water, use DNA, proteins and other types of carbon molecules. Other systems using carbon and water can exist, and some scientists believe life has begun more than once on this planet this way, so we may already know some\"extraterrestrials\" on earth.\n\nLife analogous to us would use chemicals in a similar way to us. For example, silicon could replace carbon at certain temperatures and pressures, and bromine could easily replace chlorine. Ammonia may replace water. We already know about some of our own life that evolved to do this; certain bacteria use arsenic instead of phosphorus.\n\nLife unlike us is the most intriguing. Life unlike us would be things like Megatron, the Flood, energy-based organisms, etc. They are not \"alive\" the way we would classify animals or plants, but they do things like evolve over time and reproduce. They may exist only as organizations of information in space that self-interacts. The closest analog we have would be machine organisms like skynet or transformers. If we saw one of these we would likely pass it over as a form of life.",
"First of all, what is life? We more or less define it based on where its natural to draw the line here on earth. We like to think of everything organic as life. Basically that is anything that can (attempt) to replicate itself from RNA or DNA. There might be more details to what might qualify as life, but the definitions will be termed specifically to draw where the line goes between what is life and what is not among the things we have encountered here on earth. \n\nIf we built artificial intelligence who would do all tasks required to sustain its robot life form, harvest resources, reproduce based on its own image and so forth, we do not think of it as life because it does not replicate itself with RNA and DNA cells. It's not organic. \n\nI believe that If we ever found something that perform any functions aside from chemical reactions it is likely that it neither has RNA or DNA. Regardless whether its as advanced as an animal or as basic as a bacteria, then we would have to sit down and decide what this is. Is this life? In which case, we might have to redefine what draws the line between the living and the inanimate. \n\nWhat I'm most confident about however is that evolved life on another planet would not in any way look humanoid. Infact, I doubt it would look like any known mammal, insect or anything remotely close to what we can imagine. Just think about how different animals, plants and fungi are to eachother. Fungi is even closer to animals than it is to plants. Which means way back we're related. Go far enough back, and all life on earth probably stems from the same, single-celled organisms. \n\nSo try to think of something thats alive, but more different from all life on earth than fungi is different to humans. That's what we're likely to encounter we if ever come across evolved \"life\". ",
"I remember a few years back, some group of researchers found a class of bacteria (I believe it was, someone please correct me if I'm remembering incorrectly) that had a sulfur basis for their genetic material instead of having carbon as the primary element. ",
"Well, in theory, life could be anything that could replicate itself.\n\nThat is a very vague definition, and you could say that computer viruses are indeed life, just life that requires very specific circumstances. ",
"I've heard arguments that some of the more prolific computer viruses could be considered alive in that they not only reproduce themselves across the internet, but they employ self-preservation techniques as well as change their core structure and code over time to evade detection. This makes them hard to study though.",
"When plasma clouds in space interact with dust particles, they'll self organize into plasma crystals. A team of scientists simulated these conditions and found that the crystals would form interacting helical shapes with inconsistencies exhibiting the potential to hold genetic information, similar to DNA. These helical crystals can potentially divide, conserving the \"memory marks\". While not proving anything, this suggests that we may not even be able to recognize extraterrestrial life if we do encounter it.\n\nThe study goes much deeper, please read up if it sounds interesting. Here's a lighter how stuff works article _URL_0_ and the original _URL_1_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6079/341",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micelle"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://science.howstuffworks.com/weird-life.htm",
"http://iopscience.iop.org/1367-2630/9/8/263"
]
] |
|
4hc0v0 | that dull ache in your heart when you have, well, a broken heart | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4hc0v0/eli5_that_dull_ache_in_your_heart_when_you_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2oyv13",
"d2oyvp5",
"d2oywfo"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"A lot of times when you have a strong emotional response to something, your muscles can tense up, heart rate can increase, and a number of other biological processes can happen as a result. \n\nAccording to this article I just Google'd, \"During a particularly stressful experience, the anterior cingulate cortex may respond by increasing the activity of the vagus nerve—the nerve that starts in the brain stem and connects to the neck, chest and abdomen. When the vagus nerve is overstimulated, it can cause pain and nausea.\" - [Scientific American](_URL_0_).\n\nBasically, it's just your body's response to something traumatic.\n\n*Edit: Made the citation accurate.",
"When you are emotionally distraught, sympathetic pathways in your nervous system are activated as a part of stress response. This has many complicated physiological effects. Cortisol—a \"stress hormone\"—is pumped into your system, your heart starts beating faster, your blood vessels constrict and blood pressure rises, your muscles become somewhat more tense, digestion slows down, and so on. These all can cause unpleasant sensations. Additionally, if you're crying (which often happens when emotionally stressed), fluid loss and sinus obstruction mess up your electrolyte balance, which is felt most as a headache (brain is very sensitive to fluid loss), but also throughout the body, possibly including the heart area.\n\nAll the best wishes to everyone who is sad right now for any reason. And please do correct me for any science mistakes I've made here; the last time I took a physiology course was four years ago, and I wan't the brightest student.",
"Your brain is registering the pain as a physical one and not an emotional one. \n\n[Here is a great link.](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-causes-chest-pains/"
],
[],
[
"http://www.thejournal.ie/does-heartbreak-cause-pain-1100040-Oct2013/"
]
] |
||
2zpt7f | how are kfc's 11 secret herbs and spices still a secret? | Firstly, I'm surprised that nobody has leaked the information after all this time, but I'm more curious about how nobody has taken a piece of KFC to a lab, scienced the fuck out of it, and then had a computer printout identifying the herbs and spices. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zpt7f/eli5_how_are_kfcs_11_secret_herbs_and_spices/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpl6auk"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It's not worth it. At this point, KFC could probably publish the exact recipe on the walls of their restaurants and it wouldn't make a difference. No one is going to create a chain restaurant to make the exact same thing that another chain restaurant does with no changes at all. If someone wanted to make money selling KFC fried chicken, it would be far easier and more cost efficient to just franchise a KFC. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
24fu1s | how does a normal bar of soap act to clean your hands? as far as i knew it isn't anti-bacterial? | The scientific explanation was a little hard to understand. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/24fu1s/eli5_how_does_a_normal_bar_of_soap_act_to_clean/ | {
"a_id": [
"ch6q2mj",
"ch6ri1w",
"ch6t3wp"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Oil molecules are non-polar (don't dissolve in water) and obviously water molecules are then polar (dissolve in water). Soap molecules have a polar head and a non-polar tail. Now polar substances like other polar substances and non-polar substances like other non-polar substances. However, as is the case with water and oil, non-polar and polar substances don't want to mix. What happens is that with agitation the oil droplets break up and become surrounded by these soap molecules which bury their tails in the oil droplet. The polar heads are then left to be friends with the water that surrounds it. Thereby emusifying the oil (basically the oil is floating in the water and would appear to be dissolved although it actually isn't). So next when you rinse your hands under the tap the oil runs off as it's now mixed up in the water. \n\nHope that helped :)\n\nAlso, interesting soap does have a kind of anti-bacterial affect on your skin, simply because many soaps are slightly basic and since are skin is meant to be slightly acidic this can kill many bacteria - many healthy bacteria too!",
"From a nurse in simple terms: your hands always have some amount of oil on them- it's what gives your skin flexibility and softness. remember seeing pictures of people working on archives wearing gloves to protect the old things from the oil on their skin? Dirt, and \"germs\" (bacteria, viruses, protozoa etc...) cling to your hands as well. Soap helps mix oil and water and lets you wash off part of that outer layer of oil off with the dirt and germs with water as you rinse. Rubbing your hands together helps release the oil and dirt and bacteria and viruses off your hands and into the soap and water mix. warm water helps to further release dirt and oil and germs from your hands. When you rinse your hands off it allows the mix to run down the drain. Regular soap is not antibacterial and does not have to be- it washes off the germs not kill them. Antibacterial soap is recently come under attack in the medical community for contributing to bacterial resistance and causing or contributing to many other medical issues. Some bacteria can even grow in soap. Antibacterial soap does not help make your hands or dishes or anything else \"cleaner\" the antibacterial properties are fairly limited in practice in the soap and it would take you having your hands in the soap and water for something like 25 minuets to effectively kill any meaningful amount of bacteria. But like I said above- it does not matter if the bacteria are dead or alive when you wash them down the drain- they are not on your hands / dishes/ whatever anymore and that's the point. I personally avoid antibacterial soaps. ",
"ACTUALLY, there is no evidence that anti-bacterial soap is any more effective than regular soap! _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec/16/business/la-fi-mo-fda-antibacterial-soap-rule-20131216"
]
] |
|
5527q5 | why is there such a stigma about suicide/suicidal thoughts/suicidal actions? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5527q5/eli5_why_is_there_such_a_stigma_about/ | {
"a_id": [
"d86vez1",
"d86vuvu"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It provoke emotions of hurt, confusion, denial, guilt, grieve etc. Because of that stigma many people don't seek advice and help. ",
"Many people view suicide in terms of the mess it causes, not in terms of the pain that causes someone to consider or do it. Many people see it as selfish because, after the individual is gone, their loved ones are left to deal with the emotional and situational hardship (for example, sorting their belongings or taking care of their children). Suicide is also prohibited in many religions; it is interpreted by a lot of people as squandering a life that god/s created, and therefore a sort of fuck-you to god/s. I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons, but yeah, a lot of people view another person's suicide as \"how could you even think of doing this to me\" and not \"holy shit how did you arrive at this point and how can I help\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3lhscr | how was electronic music made before logic, cubase etc.? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lhscr/eli5_how_was_electronic_music_made_before_logic/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv6fjwh",
"cv6fpbt",
"cv6gt4l"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"The earliest electronic music was done with purpose built electronics like the theremin and rhythmicon. Later in the 50s they started using special tape machines, and eventually used repurposed radio test equipment to build giant room sized synthesizers, which were shrunk down into performance instruments by the late 60s. \n\nThe first digital synthesis was done by the folks at Bell labs in the 50s as well, and the first voice synthesis shortly thereafter (the program and hardware they used was later featured in the film 2001, a space oddyssey as the voice as HAL)\n\nUp until the 80s all the electronic sounds were played live and recorded to tape, or set up with special computers and coded. The they invented MIDI in 1980 which became the standard digital communication protocol for sending notes and performance data to different instruments. After that they were able to build sequencers, which could generate midi as the artist desired, to control synthesizers. \n\nIn fact, the first software for making music like cubase were nothing but sequencer programs that connected your computer to synth hardware. It later got better when Steinberg completed VST and ASIO which are two very important software standards for generating music completely \"in the box\" as they say, or on the computer with no external hardware. Even then it wasn't until like the last 10-15 years that production could really be totally done on a pc. ",
"Depends what you mean by 'electronic music'. At their heart, Cubase, Logic etc. are just sequencers, and sequencers have existed for a long time - MIDI has only existed since the early 80's, but sequencers using the older CV (Control Voltage) systems (basic analog method of triggering a synthesiser) have been around since the 60's. \n\nYou don't even really need any of this though... if you have an electronic device capable of making noise, and something capable of recording it, you can make 'electronic music' - the other thing you're probably imagining when you think Logic/Cubase is cutting and pasting segments of recorded audio, and our system/thought process when doing this in a computer is basically ripped off from tape. In the olden days, people would physically cut and stick back together magnetic tape to do this. Radiophonic Workshop, the BBC guys (and gals) who made, amongst many other works, the famous Doctor Who theme tune, used this method heavily, back in the 60s.\n\nIf you're imagining Kraftwerk etc. though, that's pretty much all analog synths and CV/gate. For effects, you would use analog devices (think guitar pedals) and literally route the sound into them and out of them by plugging in audio cables.\n\nYes, syncing everything up when doing this is a nightmare. People still do it, though, for fun or because they find it creatively inspiring or whatever. Check out Deadmau5's old (mostly) Doepfer system on youtube if you're interested: _URL_0_ - no computer required for this!\n\ntldr: Cubase/Logic/etc. are in-the-box emulations of things people were already doing by cutting up tape and clever use of electronics, by and large. Having it all in a computer definitely made it quicker and easier, though! ",
"It was made with analog electronics: tubes, transistors, inductors.\n\nLeon Theremin is generally considered the father of electronic musical instruments, he invented the instrument that bears his name in the 1920s, and Theremins were actually somewhat popular in the US in the 1930s. RCA used to sell a home model that did quite well.\n\nLouis and Bebe Barron are considered some of the earliest electronic artists, they began experimenting with electronic tones in the 1950s, and famously supplied the futuristic soundtrack the classic SF film Forbidden Planet.\n\nRobert Moog ushered in the modern era of electronic music in the late 60s with his invention of the Moog synthesizer. In the 70s, electronic music started going digital.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D26U26fFojw&ab_channel=deadmau5"
],
[]
] |
||
6fuqez | how come humans have so many mental conditions and illnesses, yet no other species really has them? | Just wondering and it's starting to bother me lol
Edit: why all the downvotes :(
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6fuqez/eli5_how_come_humans_have_so_many_mental/ | {
"a_id": [
"dil3omz",
"dil3psg",
"dil3pwk",
"dil3z1n",
"dil60db",
"dil6mau"
],
"score": [
19,
9,
5,
3,
2,
16
],
"text": [
"That's not true at all! A major concern for zoos is the animals [becoming depressed](_URL_0_) because their enclosure is too boring (this is why reputable zoos have lots of toys and stuff for the animals to play with). There are some guides on what to look for to see if your pet dog has anxiety, with obsessive tail-chasing being one potential indicator. Here's [a longer article](_URL_1_) on animal mental illnesses. \n\nThe only reason you don't hear about this more is because it's irrelevant to most people, while human mental illnesses are a bit more relevant. It's also easier to diagnose people, because they can often talk about their symptoms, while animals cannot. ",
"You are making extreme assumptions. \n\nFirst of all, other species cannot communicate so we cannot know when they have a lot of problems unless their behavior changes severely. Second of all, most behavior severe enough to be classified as a mental illness in animals would most likely result in their death. Humans are special in that we are intelligent, communicative, and social beings that care for one another. We protect the weak among us instead of ejecting them and leaving them for dead. ",
"Other species absolutely do have the same scope of medical problems that humans have. The issue is that they go entirely untreated; a bipolar squirrel is just a weird squirrel. A crow with a learning disability ends up as roadkill.\n\nHumans have so many recognized health conditions because humans are really concerned with keeping humans alive and healthy. Not so much for wild animals.",
"You should look up the story of Arturo, the depressed polar bear that lived and died in an Argentina zoo. It was a sad and heartbreaking story. ",
"Animals that live in captivity get depressed. Animals can suffer head injuries that affect behaviour. Animals can experience trauma and ptsd. So, animals do have mental conditions. They just don't count in a way that everything humans do is considered different than what other animals do.\n\nBut also, humans have been staring at screens for over a century now, and that's got us pretty fucked up in ways that nobody really wants to admit because we're all addicted to those screens.\n\nEDIT: Case in point, every time I mention on reddit that we stare at screens too much, I get downvoted!",
"There is a theory -- sorry, can't remember the name off the top of my head -- that animals deal with stress very differently than humans do, and this enables them to regulate stress better and not get stuck in some of the patterns that humans do. So, for example, animals respond to a scary or stressful situation by shaking, vocalizing, running, etc., which humans often try to control/minimize. Also, animals are often much better about simply avoiding/fleeing from anxiety-producing situations. So many animals will, in an ordinary environment, spread out and get some distance from each other, and especially animals they don't know. Whereas humans will, for example, allow themselves to be in quite close proximity to other human animals that they don't know -- everything from elevator rides to traffic to urban living in general requires us to suppress our natural wariness of strange (human) animals. In short, humans have really powerful social drives that tend to dominate and override other instincts -- but that can come at a cost. We try very hard to avoid embarrassment, because embarrassment is an indicator of disapproval by the group, which feels like danger for highly intelligent, highly social, highly interdependent mammals like us. But to conform to our tribe's ways and not suffer embarrassment (and, ultimately, dangerous ostracism), we ignore or stifle other signals from other, perhaps more primitive parts of our nervous system -- \"I should flee!\" or \"I need to cry to relieve stress!\"\n\nThat is, of course, just one explanation of one set of mental illnesses, but I find it reasonably compelling.\n\n(And that's not to take away from the other points people have made: animals often do experience what appears to be mental illness -- especially in captivity, where, for example, they can't fully act out the behaviors that would help them reduce mental conflict, pain, and stress.)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/10/121004-animals-depression-health-science/",
"http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150909-many-animals-can-become-mentally-ill"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
eqbups | why does wind cause a flame to flicker or go out? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eqbups/eli5_why_does_wind_cause_a_flame_to_flicker_or_go/ | {
"a_id": [
"feprela"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Fire is light output produced by a chemical reaction. Specifically, the chemical reaction, normally caused by heat in the first place, creates heat that keeps the reaction going, and that heat causes light to be emitted from the chemicals involved. Wind can cool the chemicals involved in the reaction by blowing the super hot gases away from the liquid/solid chemicals and then those hot gases won’t be able to sustain the reaction that was happening."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9l2g1o | how does instinct work, how do animals just "know" how to procreate/hunt/know which plants are edible? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9l2g1o/eli5_how_does_instinct_work_how_do_animals_just/ | {
"a_id": [
"e73iffc",
"e73il6w",
"e73lmlv"
],
"score": [
7,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Evolution is the short answer: over millions of years, DNA gets bombarded with radiation and mutations arise, and the mutations that are heritable and provide a survival advantage end up getting more common, until the genetic marker that controls that trait is near ubiquitous.\n\nThe really simple answer for how that happens, is that the ones who *don't* end up with that instinct can't survive long enough to procreate, and so they die before passing on their genes. So your breeding population is left with only the ones who know how to do those things.\n\nIt almost feels like a cop-out answer, because it seems circular or overly-obvious, but that's the really simple truth of it: life couldn't survive and continue on without those instincts, and so the ones that don't have those instincts die off.",
"No one really knows for sure. It’s assumed to be an inherent mental programming that has yet to be decoded. \n\nA good example: as humans we instinctively pull away from something that causes us pain. If you touch something hot or get cut, you jerk your hand away. But you were never taught that, it just happens. \n\nSorry there isn’t a better response at this time. ",
"Begining with basic, animals that eat something dangerous, die and don't reproduce. Animals that don't know how to reproduce, die and... don't reproduce.\n\n\nYou feel disgusted when you see a cockroach, kids feel afraid of fire, you have focus on animals that are red/yellow and become afraid.\n\n\nAll this things are \"hardcoded\" in the DNA / brain, and maybe can be changed with learning, but evolution made this chemical reactions possible, because who are afraid of this things, live to pass their DNA.\n\n\nP.S: A LOT of animals died before the livings came here, so, a lot of them didn't know how to do this stuff and are just dead.\n\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7y4co7 | how is it that water soluble vitamins can be simply pissed out in case you take to much of it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7y4co7/eli5how_is_it_that_water_soluble_vitamins_can_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"dudj4jb",
"dudj6vc",
"dudj72c"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"The function of the kidneys are in part to control levels of substances in the blod and remove thing that should not be there. So they will regulate the amount of water solvable vitamins. They can't excrete fat solvable vitamins.\n\nYou can notice that when urine is not just a excess amount of water but is contains other chemicals like uric acid and ammonium.",
"There is no way to stop it. If the molecules are present in the blood and small enough to escape via the kidneys into the urine, then that's what they will do. It's physics.",
"Take a cup of water, pour some salt in it. Stir, and watch it dissolves. Pour some more salt, stir, watch it dissolve. Repeat until no matter how much you stir, it won’t go away. You have now reached saturation. If you take too many vitamins, same thing happens, they just can’t be “absorbed” after a certain point. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
44kwoy | why are large ships unceremoniously dumped into the water when finished? | Seems like a fairly violent way to enter the world; is it tradition or is there a reason they can't be acclimated in a dry dock? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/44kwoy/eli5_why_are_large_ships_unceremoniously_dumped/ | {
"a_id": [
"czqx7np",
"czqxf85",
"czr360q"
],
"score": [
8,
13,
3
],
"text": [
"It's probably just the best way to handle constructing it. It's much more easier and practical to construct it on dry land and slide it in (or dump it) than to construct a pen and pump the water out (not to mention the safety issues of holding back a wall of water). Besides, with the storms out there, if a ship like that can't handle being dumped into the water, it isn't too sea-worthy in general. So you could probably think of them doing that as a test of the ship, too.",
"Why use a dry dock if you don't have to? If you're building a ship in a dry dock, then that's it out of use for a few years. It's far better to keep the dry dock for existing ships that need maintenance, and build your new ships on land where you're not occupying expensive facilities.",
"The sea is violent, and the ships are designed to sustain the forces involved with 'dumping' them from the dry-dock. Think of it like dropping your off-road remote control truck on the ground from a height of maybe a foot. It might look a little rough but it can handle that kind of thing. I'm guessing dumping the boat in this way is the easiest method that requires the least extra engineering. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
fyquza | we’re all currently using or seeing live footage of skype etc. a lot more than normal. why is the quality still so poor and laggy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fyquza/eli5_were_all_currently_using_or_seeing_live/ | {
"a_id": [
"fn1qy8j"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I would say there are several contributing reasons why the quality has stayed so low after all these years.\n\nStaying with old systems: I would bet Skype is still using the same old video streaming code from the old days. There's only so far it can go before needing a full replacement. While the code could probably provide excellent quality, they may feel it's not worth the cost.\n\nKeeping quality low for slow internet users: This one is kinda only half a truth. Youtube is a good example of how a video service can allow any level of internet speed. However, with a live video stream, it's a bit more work to provide multiple resolutions. Twitch, for example, used to limit changing video resolution to only popular channels. This kept costs down because they didn't have to re-scale the numerous streams with only a few watchers. It's hard to say whether or not syke could even do it. Their old code might make it impossible.\n\nReducing server overhead: Simply put, if you have a million people streaming 1080p video feeds, that's gonna take a lot of servers to support. It's impossible to know how much of an impact this had without seeing inside Skype."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4nqnu2 | why does reddit allow free discussion regarding the shooting of a singer but shuts down discussion on a night club shooting of gays by a muslim? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4nqnu2/eli5why_does_reddit_allow_free_discussion/ | {
"a_id": [
"d464ehz"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Because the mods of some subs close comment sections because people frequently violate their rules. You can open your own sub and let free discussion reign."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3bs2sw | how does your brain know how much/percentage of each brain chemical to produce to keep most people baselien or"sane"? (as opposed to people who suffer from chemical imbalances? | Chemicals such as serotonin, dopamine, and endorphin's. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bs2sw/eli5_how_does_your_brain_know_how_muchpercentage/ | {
"a_id": [
"csp0x0p"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"All substances in biology are kept in check by feedback systems. It's quite brilliant in its simplicity. A typical feedback system might be the substance in question binds to a promoter protein, and when the substance is bound that promoter protein won't bind to DNA to tell DNA to make more proteins to make the substance in question. When the concentration of the substance is too low, the promoter protein will be able to bind DNA and promote the synthesis of the substance.\n\nThis is only one basic way a feedback loop can work in biology, but there are many examples that have more steps and can even work in reverse. Some aren't even based on DNA transcription but are based on destroying or modifying proteins as they come out. But the overall theme is that the cell can \"sense\" the concentration of a substance based on that substance's binding strength to something that is involved with that substance's production. Feedback loop.\n\nEdit: I guess I didn't specify how this applies to your question. Sorry. So when the feedback loop is messed up the levels of things get messed up too. Cancer cells are developed because normal cells' feedback systems tell them to self-destruct when they go crazy, but cancer cells' systems are broken. For whatever reason, people who suffer from chemical imbalances have their feedback systems screwed up. Now this could be the brain responding to any number of different stimuli, so it's rarely fair (I'm guessing here) to assume that someone's proteins aren't binding in the normal way because of some mutation and that's causing these feedback loops to change. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4breux | how can a domesticated dog believe it is the alpha of the pack if it relies on us to feed them, take them for walks and generally nurture them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4breux/eli5_how_can_a_domesticated_dog_believe_it_is_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1bp50m",
"d1btwvq",
"d1bv2o0",
"d1byabh"
],
"score": [
179,
34,
5,
7
],
"text": [
"Dogs are not pack animals, neither are wolves. Wolves live in nuclear family units where mom and dad are \"alpha\" for the same reason mom and dad are in charge in human families - because they know how best to survive and they're the ones getting food. Dogs are even more social and look up to their humans partly because we feed them, but mostly because we've spent thousands of years breeding them to make them obsessed with us. If a dog is misbehaving, it's largely for the same reasons that human children misbehave: they know they can get away with it. Other causes include poor care from the owners, as many breeds (like Huskies) are incredibly smart and energetic and need to be engaged. Basically, they act out because they're *bored* and have too much energy.\n\n[Scholarly source](_URL_0_).\n\nThe \"strict pack hierarchy\" theory came from a single book published in the 30s by a scientist studying wolves in zoos. Subsequent studies that \"confirmed\" his findings likewise studied captive wolves. Modern studies have shown that captive behavior is not indicative of natural, wild behavior, and the first author who published that book later retracted his findings. The myth persists because it's romantic and cool. In any case, even if it were true, dogs may be related to wolves, but dogs are not wolves, and their behavior has to be considered in that context.\n\nSo, wolves are not strictly hierarchical pack animals. Dogs are also not wolves. Dogs are really really *not* strictly hierarchical. They don't think they're the alpha, they are just poorly trained, misbehaving children.",
"here is my take on it. (fwiw i have over 10 years training dogs as pets in family settings (the house they lived in))\n\n\nas you mentioned a dog cannot be truly alpha. not living in a home with humans. we determine so many different aspects that the leader would, such as what territory we operate in and what times, feeding, often when and how we praise/reward/interact with them. \n\n\nbut with a very dominant dog, and non-assertive owners, a dog can feel it is in charge of certain aspects. enough so that it believes it is the boss. i call these behaviors, 'bully behaviors'. examples are pawing at you to get attention, or bringing you the ball over and over, or barking to get you do to something, bolting out and in the door ahead of you, deciding who is ok and not ok to hang out in the house and the list can go on.\n\n\nthe dogs have learned that they can do x, and get you to do y. you essentially taught them that. with a lot of dogs, this isn't a huge issue.\n\n\nBUT...\n\n\nwith a dominant dog, that is allowed to assume control over various aspects and starts to believe and act like they are the alpha, they are not satisfied. and the reasons are the ones mentioned in the OP's title. when it becomes problematic is when a dog overcompensates for this.\n\n\nwhat i mean is that since the dog doesnt feel totally in charge, it tends to exert more and more control where it does have influence. these bullying behaviors get worse. you can't enjoy watching tv anymore, you are scared to have people over because you don't know if this person might set you dog off. your life starts to suffer bc of these behaviors.\n\n\nthat is when it is not fair to you or your dog. your dog obviously isn't satisfied bc it can never become a true leader of your pack. you aren't happy bc of everything your dog is trying to do to compensate and control as much as they can. this is when you start to incorporate dominance reinforcing principles in part of your daily interactions.\n\n\n1. the dog must stay after the food is in the bowl either in a sit or preferably down posture (down is the most submissive posture) for a good 10-30 seconds and then is released to be allowed to eat.\n\n2. the food only stays down 15 minutes. if your dog doesn't eat then, tough. yes folks, tough. you see if you give your dog a chance to eat twice a day for 15 minutes, it will never starve. it hasn't happened in the history of a healthy dog. but if the food is down all the time, it can be sensed as a 'downed prey environment'. meaning that the kill has been made, and its waiting to be eaten. why would it be waiting? oh bc the dog is the boss and the owners are fearful/respectful enough to not let it eat first. 15 minutes and pick it up. your dog will cave, dont cave first. i assure you, your dog WILL eat. (it might take a couple days though. and that also is okay with a healthy dog)\n\n3. make the dog wait to go in and out of doors. this is easily done using a leash. yes its inconvenient, but it is also temporary. there is another technique that involves opening the door a fraction and closing it back quickly and in a varied pattern (ie: unpredictable) opening the door a bit more or less and closing it back after varied delays. essentailly showing the dog that it is not a safe environment (this is true, if not for the reasons that we can express to a dog). get them in the habit of waiting for permission to go in and out of the house or gate or whatever.\n\n4. make praise conditional on performance. dog wants a belly rub, sure thing, just sit and stay and lay down and shake and ok heres that belly rub buddy! by making your praise/affection tied to pleasing you, it reinforces that you are the leader and that good things happen by following.\n\n5. i like to recommend one extended down stay a day... like 10 minutes or more. it just flexes a bit that hey, im the boss and i want you to settle down for just a moment.\n\n\nfor bullying behaviors- it depends and there is no one size fits all approach. the most effective solutions ive found involve a negative action when they do that undesired behavior and a positive for the absence of it. dog pawing at you for attention? grab its paw just firm enough that it cant pull it away, and hold it for a few seconds a little closer to you (extending their arm further than they chose to) and release. that clearly says i don't decide when your paw goes on me, but i do decide when you get it back. dont like it? well dont put your paw on me silly. when you see the dog almost paw you and then stop and sit there, praise the heck out of them.\n\nbarking can be tricky, but a shake can (10 pennies in an empty and clean soda can w/ some tape on the top, used by shaking very quickly downwards one or two times. making all the pennies hit the top at once and creating a startling noise) or a spray bottle. \n\nagain when you see the dog almost start barking or catch himself and stop.. reward the heck out of him. i recommend praise over treats. \n\n\nedited to add- this typically takes 2-4 weeks to completely overcome but results can be seen as quickly as the first day. also, i apologize that it isn't really directed at a 5 year old. but it is my understanding after training well over a thousand dogs of different breeds, temperaments and more importantly types of owners. (that is the hardest part.)",
"I don't think domesticated dog's do think they are the alpha.\n\nOccasionally I hear of someone who's got a dog that growls at them or is generally a moody ball of teeth, far from thinking it's the alpha it's probably just a badly behaved dog.\n\nI have 2 dogs, one of which is stubborn as shit and outrageously aggressive, literally hates everything, dogs, cats(especially cats) birds, balls of fluff, leaves, savaged a crisp packet a few days ago, if it isn't a family member, he has an inclination to kill it, but, if anyone in the family, including my 2 young children raise their voice, he immediately goes into subservient mode.\n\nHe definitely doesn't think he's the alpha. He also gets owned by the wife's pug on a regular basis.",
"The whole \"alpha\" thing is a bit of a myth for dogs/wolves, popularized by incredibly terrible studies that were heavily criticized in their time but somehow were propagated culturally anyway. It basically boiled down to keeping a bunch of wild animals in tightly cramped quarters with no room to exercise and nothing to interact with, and you'd have one prison psycho canine who slightly more maladjusted than the others that nobody wanted to mess with, so they'd give him space and first dibs on food.\n\nIt's a more complicated social structure than that in the wild. The most aggressive or biggest dog is not the \"leader\". It's more of a seniority based hierarchy that's learned from when they're a pup and carried over to when they're older.\n\nAggressiveness isn't about who is in charge so much as it's about understanding where boundaries are for acceptable behavior. Dogs may take your lead and see you as the one with the plan that everyone should follow, but simply not understand that their kneejerk growling reaction isn't socially acceptable as part of a group. Like a toddler with big fangs that knows you're the boss, but doesn't understand why throwing a tantrum won't help their situation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15857815"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2gf5q0 | why do viruses and sicknesses always produce negative effects? wouldn't a virus survive and be transmitted more successfully if they didn't produce symptoms, or even produce positive symptoms? | I feel kind of sick right now, it would be cool if that meant I felt better than usual | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gf5q0/eli5_why_do_viruses_and_sicknesses_always_produce/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckij5dt",
"ckijbe2",
"ckijh56",
"ckijr9a"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Sure! In fact, viruses tend to co-evolve with their hosts to be less pathogenic. Herpes is an excellent example of this.\n\nAs for positive 'symptoms', that is unlikely, as the simple fact that virus replication is inherently detrimental to the host due to cell death.",
"Most illnesses go completely unnoticed and are relatively benign. Most scientists believe that there was actually one bacteria however that, not only improved its host life, but would kill you in a matter of seconds if it were removed. Mitochondria in your cells help to produce energy for your cells to use, and many think that they are ancient bacteria that were improperly digested by cells. There are also bacteria in your gut that aid in digestion, but they are less vital.\n\nBut going back to your question, coughing and diarrhea are both big warning signs that someone is sick. One part of this is that you only get these reactions when you are in advanced stages of illness. For many illnesses, they have started spreading to a new host long before this point. Additionally, coughing and many other symptoms are fantastic methods to propel a bug into the air or water supply (it wasn't until the last few hundred years that armies began separating waste areas and eating areas by a significant amount).",
"They don't always produce negative effects. Viruses aren't \"alive\" and are nothing more than strings of RNA/DNA that get inserted into cells. There are plenty of viruses that inserted their DNA into our cells and evolution said \"Hey, that'll work out nicely\" and we kept them. In that sense, the virus worked with the host to create a positive effect.",
"We call them those things *because* they make us sick. All of the other trillions of bacteria in our bodies that don't make us sick usually aren't called illnesses.\n\n\nYou're essentially asking something like \"Why are all nightmares bad? Why don't we have good nightmares?\"\n\n\nWe do. They're just called \"dreams\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3seon1 | heart bypass surgery | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3seon1/eli5_heart_bypass_surgery/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwwjh20",
"cwwjvr4",
"cwwk0je"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The functions of the heart are preformed by a machine, so the heart is \"bypassed\" by said machine. A quadruple bypass, is a complete disconnection of the 4 main flows of the heart. The machine literally replaces the heart during that time. My daughter is 11, and has had 3 valve replacement, which require quadruple bypass.",
"Heart bypass surgery is when they reroute blood around a blocked blood vessel in your heart. They basically take a vein from some where else in your body (usually the leg) and attach it above the blockage and then attach the other end below the blockage as a detour around the block. The number (triple, quadruple), is the number of blockages they bypass. So quadruple bypass means that they rerouted blood around four blockages. ",
"Like any other muscle, your heart needs blood flowing to it to work properly. The little 'rivers' that bring blood to the heart muscle are called coronary arteries. Sometimes those 'rivers' get plugged up so the blood can't get through very well. Kinda like a beaver dam blocks up a real river. \n\nIn bypass surgery, the surgeon basically takes a vein from another part of your body (usually a leg) and uses it to create an alternate path that will go around the dammed up area of your coronary artery river. Kind of like if there's construction on the highway, there might be a detour so you can still get to where you're going. The bypass is the detour to get around the clog.\n\nSingle, double, triple, etc, are the number of detours the surgeon makes depending on how many of your arteries are clogged up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1gvzmj | when, if ever, i should use the parking brake on a car that has an automatic transmission. | After years of relying on public transit, I just bought a used car and want to take care of it to the best of my ability. I am not a car person at all, so I am giving myself a quick education.
Most things I have been able to figure out on my own. What I was surprised to see that my owner's manual says to always use the parking brake when parking the car. A quick google search leads to forum discussions that are generally inconclusive-- some people say it is utterly irrelevant and others that parking without using the parking brake is hell on the transmission. Others say to only bother if parking on a hill.
How much is this worth worrying about? To the extent that I should always park with the parking brake, what is the exact procedure? Stop, apply parking brake, shift to park? Or stop, shift to park, apply parking brake? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1gvzmj/eli5_when_if_ever_i_should_use_the_parking_brake/ | {
"a_id": [
"caod1ot",
"caody85",
"caogzgd",
"caojh7x"
],
"score": [
13,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"If I had to guess, using the parking brake would put less strain on parts of the transmission when parking on an incline. Set the parking brake before releasing the foot brake.\n\nStop, shift to park, apply parking brake, release foot brake.\n\nThat all being said, if I had to guess, most drivers don't bother.\n",
"The best general rule for using a parking brake with an automatic transmission:\n\n1. Stop the car. Do not remove your foot from the brake.\n2. Place the car in park.\n3. Put the parking brake on.\n4. Turn off the key.\n5. Take your foot off the brake.\n\nAn automatic transmission has internal lugs that engage when the car is in park, and if the parking brake is not on, they will take up the strain if the car moves slightly. This is usually not a problem, but the way to ensure the least wear or risk for your transmission is to disengage it and place the parking brake BEFORE relieving the pressure on the foot brake.\n\nThat will ensure that the wheels remain in the same place relative to the drivetrain, preventing any strain from being applied by the car's weight against the internals.\n\nAnd all that said- don't worry too much about this kind of thing. The car is more durable than you think. Don't abuse it and get into good habits and it'll last you for decades.\n\n",
"There is a conclusion you can draw from your google search: using the parking break when parking is never a bad idea.\n\nIf you want to reduce the wear to an absolute minimum you could follow Big_Daddy_PDX' advise.\n\nThe sensible and practical approach would be to make sure that when the car is parked, it is in park and the parking break engaged.",
"Using the parking bake consistently makes sure the cable connecting the break to the wheel is not rusting through, using the parking break is actually better for it. \n\nAlso, don't forget to curb your tires, this avoids tickets and gives you another safety measure so your car won't roll off a cliff"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4e5o6m | why can't we just eat pills for all the necessary nutrients daily and bare minimum carbs? will we survive if we do just that? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4e5o6m/eli5_why_cant_we_just_eat_pills_for_all_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1x7ou1",
"d1x7oxe",
"d1x85gs",
"d1x8fsy"
],
"score": [
5,
5,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"You can take multivitamins to get your vitamins & minerals because the recommended daily intake is often only a few milligrams. One or two pills can supply everything you need.\n\nIt doesn't work that way with the things you need to get *energy* from. To hit a 2000 calorie diet with just eating fat (the most energy dense option a 9cal/g) you'd need to eat something in the ballpark of two sticks of butter. If we look at sugar (4cal/g) we're talking about *nearly a pound*.\n\n...and people actually *enjoy* eating so they'd rather not be stuffing tons of flavorless pills down their gullet every day.",
"It's not healthy, but yes it is possible. There was actually a very overweight man who lost a lot weight in a year by doing exactly this with doctor's supervision.\n\nAnd that's essentially how Matt Damon survived in The Martian. (I know it's a movie/book, but it was still fairly scientifically accurate for the most part)",
"[You could do that](_URL_0_), and you probably will survive. How long? I can't really say.",
"Some of the necessary nutrients would be macronutrients to provide energy, like carbohydrate, protein and fat. You'd need such a large volume of pills to provide these that it would start to feel like you're just eating food.\n\nYou could eat rice and beans, those are both kind of pill shaped sources of carbohydrate and protein. Throw in a few quail eggs for pill-shaped fat and protein and you've got a nice meal that's pretty much just a version of what most people eat anyway: food."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://robrhinehart.com/?p=298"
],
[]
] |
||
4cn5ko | why are police departments allowed to withhold body cam footage after officer involved shootings? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4cn5ko/eli5_why_are_police_departments_allowed_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1jowhk",
"d1jp7lc",
"d1jpa22"
],
"score": [
18,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"A big reason is that releasing a video before a trial can taint the jury pool. It's very easy for the media to constantly play a video and present only one side (usually the victim). This makes a fair trial very difficult.",
"I could be wrong, but its probably for the same reason they tell you not to say anything without a lawyer present. Depending on viewpoints things can look a lot more damming than they really are. There used to be a TV PSA that showed a scene from different views. One shows a woman being shoved into the street by what looks like a maniac. The next shows what looks like him raching for her purse. The final scene shows him pushing her out from a falling piano that had broken loose form the crane lifting it to an upper story. Something like that anyways. ",
"One reason is that there privacy issues concerning the person who was shot and other people who may be in the video. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2amsbx | how does belly dancing fit in with socially conservative islamic middle eastern cultures? | To be honest I'm not even sure if it's authentically middle-eastern, or if it's like fortune cookies. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2amsbx/eli5_how_does_belly_dancing_fit_in_with_socially/ | {
"a_id": [
"ciwq08b",
"ciwq5a8"
],
"score": [
4,
5
],
"text": [
"The practice predates islam. In many stringently islamic countries the practice has been driven out of existence entirely. It has only survived in more secular countries such as Egypt and turkey. Interesting as the practices have grown in western popularity from the 60s on....they have been increasingly forbidden or surpressed from the late 70s, early 80s in the middle eastern regions they began in. ",
"It is middle eastern, and it's roots precede islam. There are many forms / places where it is not sexualized like it is when run through a western filter. \n\nThat said, the cultures in _most_ middle eastern countries and cities are probably not as you imagine. The night life in Amman is rich and exciting and filled with tight outfits, as sexy as you'd find in NYC. The party culture in Beirut is wilder than anything in the U.S., at least in my experience. While other countries - saudi arabia being the obvious example - do not have this dimension to their culture, the actual cultures of the middle east and of countries that are primarily islamic are quite varied."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
5m8rt9 | why does a company want to sell my personal info? to whom? for how much? what's the data even look like? | I keep reading that companies like Facebook, Google, and so many others like to collect our personal information to sell it. But to whom? What's that information even look like? Is it an Excel document that has my name and some columns with checkmarks confirming I watch porn and love video games? Who would buy that data and how much do they spend on it? How would they then use that data once they have it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5m8rt9/eli5_why_does_a_company_want_to_sell_my_personal/ | {
"a_id": [
"dc1nwzu",
"dc1oucn",
"dc1oxn0"
],
"score": [
52,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"So the big common misunderstanding is that Facebook, Google, and most large companies **don't** actually sell your personal information. Yes they collect it, but they don't sell it. Smaller and more unscrupulous companies will sell your data though, usually to email spammers.\n\nThe big guys instead collect it, research it, and both share the results of that research and use that research to build more targeted ads.\n\nIf some random company is like \"I have a product for cat lovers, I'd love to buy some ads on facebook in front of people who like cats\" Facebook can not only make *exactly that* happen for that company, they can also tell things like \"people over 40 are more likely to click on these links\" \"surfers are more likely to click on these links\" and stuff like that. So now you can put your ads for cat products in front of surfers too, since you know they're more likely to buy it than other demographics.\n\nKnowing *what kind of person* wnats to buy your stuff is extremely important, because it lets you put the ads or the product right in front of the kind of people who are most likely to be your customers.",
"Generally it's not an excel document since it's generally massive and more efficient to do so in another manner, however it looks just like an excel document with checkmarks of certain behaviors. With that very rarely do they say \"John Smith went to this website at this time to buy this product\". Generally they make your data anonymous and include general information about your actions. I recently finished a project that dealt with buying prospective customers in the insurance industry so I'll give you a story.\n\nIf you type search for an insurance policy online and give your email to a website, that website can turn around to a 3rd party company that cleans up your data, adds to it using cookies on your browser and estimates some stuff about you (age, sex, income, location etc.) based on your other habits. From there an insurance agent buys your information from that 3rd party company. The price is based on how valuable you are, income, assets, chance you'll sign up for a policy all, come into play. I've seen $20 for a single persons info down to $1 per person in a bulk buy. ",
"I worked with these kind of people for a while. At least sort of.\n\nSo I worked in the It department of a major Car Dealership chain. We had 10 different buildings with 18 different manufacturers.\n\nPart of my job was to export data to several different companies for various reasons.\n\nSo when you buy a car, or get service done, you get a customer profile built in the system. This typically includes a bunch of general info about you and your car. Sometimes this means your SSN. Well, Dealerships love sending out letters to their customers, or anyone really, about how they really need some new stock, so they'll give you a great deal on a new car, or a trade in, or something else.\n\nThese are called mailers. We pay a third party company to make mailers for us. Part of the deal, is we export a bunch of client info for them, and they send out the mailers.\n\nNow, naturally, this sounds like a super exploitable system, and it is/was depending on who you ask.\n\nThere are several companies that create these dealership software systems, but there are really 2 or 3 big ones across the USA. The big ones have standards, and typically require the small 3rd party companies to apply for a license to export data. So the Big company would charge the littler company somewhere around $80,000 to grant them permission to a data feed.\n\nNow, as much as we'd like to believe that being certified means that these 3rd party companies were clean and ethical, we know they weren't.\n\nWe know this because of cross dealership bleeding.\n\nSo, lets say I buy my car at the Toyota dealership. Then a couple months later I'm going to start getting mailers from the Toyota dealership \"General Manager\" about service specials or trade in opportunities. This is normal, and should technically happen.\n\nExcept maybe a year or two later, I get a mailer from the Hyundai dealership about *their* service specials and their trade in offers. See, someone at Hyundai was \"clever\" and bought a chunk of customers from the mailer company in a hope to reach new clients.\n\nNow apply this to almost every other piece of junk mail you probably get, and you get an idea of why people want your information.\n\nEdit: The data looks messy in a standard .CSV file. CSV stands for comma seperated values. And in notepad it would look like this\n\nJohn Does, 1952, 123 Street Ln, Town, Zip, Toyota, 801237, Sport, White, White,\n \nJane Doesnt, 1983,,,,Toyota 423414,, Gold, Tan\n\nJose Can, 1990, 456 Curbside St, Town, Zip, Scion, 210543, D, Blue, Black"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
c0n4ko | what's the difference between guitar amps and speakers? | Earlier today I played some music on my phone through my amp with an aux adaptor. Quality-wise it sounded like an old radio, despite being a quality piece of kit. What makes the amp's output different to a normal speaker? Could I put my electric guitar through a normal speaker?
Sidenote: The reason I did this was because I wanted to practise the changes to a song on my sax and my phone has an app that computer generated backing. Because I like to imagine myself as the next Dexter Gordon, there's no way I'd be able to hear the backing over myself with just a bluetooth speaker. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c0n4ko/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_guitar_amps_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"er5yucr",
"er63ug6"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"A guitar amp & speaker is designed to change the raw sound of the electric guitar. This is partly to do with history, and partly to do with physics.\n\nThe physics of the electric guitar means that is you put it through a high fidelity amplifier - like a PA, domestic hifi or even bluetooth speaker - it sounds rubbish. Guitar amps have evolved over time from trying to be high fidelity to sculpting the sound to make the guitar sound as good as possible.\n\nThe downside of that is that sculpting is that if you try to use it to replace a high fidelity amp, then it sounds like you have found; rubbish.\n\n\nThese days an alternative approach to guitar amps is to use amp and speaker modelling to give you that good sound, which you can put through a hifi amplifier. Aficionados may say it doesn’t sound as good, but it’s more convenient and less expensive.",
"Other comments have danced around what I think is the simplest answer so I’ll just go ahead and make it clear:\n\nGuitar amps are really specialized speakers and circuits that are designed to take a very specific input sound (the electric signal coming out of the guitar) and process it into a pretty specific output (the sounds we associate with an electric guitar). \n\nAs with all sounds, electric guitars have a general structure of frequencies stacked on each other that give them their unique character. An amp is designed to squish and saturate the input sound to get close to that structure and then, and this is important, play it quite loud.\n\nAny other thing possibly at play here is that if the amp you were using is based on analog tube technologies (which modern mid range/higher end and almost all vintage amps are), those don’t function the same at low and high volumes. If you were trying to listen to music at a modest volume through the amp you may not have pushed the tubes hard enough to get any of the richness and aforementioned squishing and saturation out of those tubes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
r658q | how the little flippy thing at the bottom of rear-view mirrors works. | EDIT: Okay, I guess I'm really asking *why* it works. I understand what the tab does. I just can't fathom how adjusting the angle of the mirror doesn't change where I'm looking. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/r658q/eli5_how_the_little_flippy_thing_at_the_bottom_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4388by",
"c439dvg",
"c439xgc",
"c43b730",
"c43bdpq",
"c43boww",
"c43d3al"
],
"score": [
149,
6,
3,
5,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The mirror is not ground flat -- the front glass surface is at an angle to the back (mirrored) surface.\n\nWhen you \"flip\" the mirror, the back mirrored surface actually points toward the dark ceiling, so you don't see that image. What you see instead is the image reflecting off the front of the glass, and this is much dimmer that the pure reflected image so it does not hurt your eyes.\n\n[Source](_URL_0_)",
"I actually did this for the first time today! mind blown",
"what is \"the little flippy thing\"? ",
"I don't drive, and so for years I assumed that the flippy thing DID change the angle of where the driver was looking! Blew my mind when I discovered that it doesn't.\n\nI also didn't know that the turn signal will turn itself off if the steering wheel turns far enough.",
"My GF keeps hers in the up position but aligned properly, that way when she moves it to the down position the mirror is low enough to see herself. 'Hey that's not what it's for!' I say.",
"The rear-view mirror only ever does one thing. It reflects a lot of the light at one angle, and a little of the light at a different angle.\n\nDuring the day, you adjust the mirror so that the \"lots of light\" angle goes between your eyes and the road behind you. The \"little light\" angle hits either the roof of your car or the back seat, depending on if the tab is up or down.\n\nDuring the night, you flip the tab, which puts the \"little light\" angle towards the road behind you. You still get a big portion of the light from the roof/back seat, but since the road is so much brighter, the smaller portion of the brighter light source looks brighter to you.\n\n(If the \"little light\" side points to the roof during the day, then the \"lots of light\" side points to the back seat during the night. It's the other way around if you set the mirror up the other way. Anyhow, the point is that \"lots of the road behind you\" and \"a little bit of the interior of the car\" looks mostly like the road behind you. And \"a little bit of the road behind you\" and \"lots of the interior of the car\" looks mostly like the road behind you, so long as the road is much brighter than the interior of the car. If you parents ever yelled at you for having bright electronics/interior car lights/whatever during night drives, this is part of why they want that turned off.)",
"I had been driving for over four years before I knew that thing even existed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question20.htm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6gsna2 | what's "the aura" people see when they have seizures? | What exactly is it and why it happens | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6gsna2/eli5_whats_the_aura_people_see_when_they_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"disx717"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The aura is a bright or blurry light that people can see before they have seizures.\n\nThink of the brain like a cloud. In a normal brain, the cloud shoots lightning bolts every now and then to activate different parts of the body.\n\nWhen a person has a seizure the cloud turns into a storm cloud and shoots a bunch of lightning bolts really fast to random parts of the body. This makes all the different parts of the body start to shake and contract randomly.\n\nThe aura seen by people who experience seizures is caused by a random bit of lightning striking the parts of the brain responsible for the senses. This can give the illusion of a bright light, or strange sounds/smells. All this can be seen as a warning that the big storm is about to come"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3iai8w | why is james joyce on every "best writers of all time" list? | I get James Joyce is a good writer, but he's listed number one on more than a few critics' "best of" book lists.
In my mind, Ulysses was "okay". It didn't really strike me as the masterwork people say it is. I haven't read his other works.
Is there something I'm missing? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3iai8w/eli5why_is_james_joyce_on_every_best_writers_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cueqdzn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
" > Is there something I'm missing? \n\n\nFinnegans Wake"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1ffp1v | why is genetic diversity important? | Iv been reading about colonizing other planets and the need for a large gene pool is always brought up, why is this important? Is it to do with interbreeding problems and what causes those problems? (sorry if this isn't the appropriate subreddit I'm not sure if I'd understand a very scientific response) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ffp1v/why_is_genetic_diversity_important/ | {
"a_id": [
"ca9t8wq"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Resistance to disease is a major reason for this. In a population of people with similar genetics you run a high risk of rare, recessive diseases cropping up in the population. This is the problem with inbreeding. With recessive disease, you have to have two parents donate the same kind of defective gene in order for it to manifest at all. Otherwise one parent will give a disease gene, while the other parent will give a normal gene and you have a normal, healthy baby. With a large mix of genetics a recessive disease is likely to go unexpressed because of the majority of other individuals having a dominant, healthy gene to 'cover up' the disease. Basically all people are carriers for at least a couple of genetic diseases, and so long as there's an abundant mix of genetics to go around we're unlikely to pair up with another individual who happens to carry the same rare disease.\n\nOn the other hand, in terms of non-genetic diseases a person's genetics help determine a person's immune system and the types of bacteria/microorganisms we're resistant to. If everyone is related due to a small population size, the population is likely to be susceptible to the same diseases. This means that if one of those diseases reaches the population it's likely to be decimated. If, however, there is good genetic diversity then you can expect only a few individuals to die from exposure to the disease. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
27zmrx | what does tesla opening its patents mean for the future? | It sounds great on paper, and maybe it is, but I've learned to never take anything at face value. I read the letter from Elon Musk but I'm still not entirely understanding of the kind of potential this implies. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27zmrx/eli5what_does_tesla_opening_its_patents_mean_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci5y19z"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's basically in Tesla's best interest to help promote the spread of electric vehicles in the country, and opening other manufacturers to access the Superchargers or use Tesla patents will help that.\n\nFirst, there's environmental reasons; our cars put out a lot of carbon, and Musk claims to have interest in helping fix that.\n\nSecond, with Tesla opening a huge factory to make EV batteries, it's in their best interest if more EVs are on the road... and especially if those are compatible with Tesla's batteries."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1n2uel | how the brain works for epileptic patients who have had their corpus callosum severed. | I've read a lot about this, but I still can't make sense of how a person can see something, but not be able to say what they're seeing...
Example: patient is shown a picture on their left side, but when asked what they were shown cannot say, but they can draw it? Why is this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1n2uel/eli5_how_the_brain_works_for_epileptic_patients/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccf6cyh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"We'll, because the two halves of the brain deal with different things. However, if the corpus callosum is severed, the two halves cannot communicate. So one half can \"see\" something but it can't tell the other half (used for talking) what it's seeing. An analogy, me and some dude named Joey (We're like the different halves of the brain). Me and Joey talk everyday on our phones (the corpus callosum), and I tell him that I saw a cat today and he tells his friend (let's say) Keith, that I saw a cat today. Now Joey, is a freeloader who can't pay his bill, so now we don't talk. I saw a dog today, but how can Joey tell Keith that, if I can't tell Joey in the first place? TLDR: the two halves cannot communicate. Edit: I'm a little bit rusty an might have skewed the different parts thing. Both halves can see, but they only each see for one eye. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
dfsso4 | how screen protectors protect your screen from shattering? | Does it even do that? Or is just overkill to have a screen protector? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dfsso4/eli5_how_screen_protectors_protect_your_screen/ | {
"a_id": [
"f35m0bh",
"f35pn9t"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"When you fall you put your hands out to catch yourself. Now your hands are scraped up.\n\nIf you wear gloves and fall, your gloves get scraped up and your hands are fine.",
"Screen protectors do not protect your screen from shattering (not even a little bit).\n\nThey protect it from scratches.\n\nAs you move your phone in and out of your pocket it is possible tiny grains of dirt can impart little scratches onto the surface glass of the phone (which over time add up till your screen looks terrible). That or you drop the phone and the screen scrapes some rocks.\n\nModern cell phones (the good ones at least) use Gorilla Glass which is very hard and resistant to scratching. Cheaper phones will use something less scratch resistant.\n\nThe idea behind a screen protector is if it gets scratched up it is a lot cheaper to replace than the phone itself."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
433snf | in terms of genetics, what is a 'library' | I am a neuroscience MA student, and I am an RA in a neuroepigenetics lab. I do a lot of basic bench work, neuronal nuclei isolation, dissections, immunohistochemistry, but I don't touch any genetic-related experiments like PCR or Bisulfite Conversions. But I always hear the term DNA Libraries thrown around. I tried looking on wikipedia, but since I only have an intermediate understanding of biology and an entry level of genetics, I don't understand what it all means/used for. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/433snf/eli5_in_terms_of_genetics_what_is_a_library/ | {
"a_id": [
"czf6yzk"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Basically it's a collection of genes that have been identified, that we know their purpose and we know the DNA sequence that codes them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
49nssr | what defines a food as a "breakfast" food? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49nssr/eli5_what_defines_a_food_as_a_breakfast_food/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0t9xuv",
"d0ta5o9",
"d0tbm6d",
"d0tcuij"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"It's entirely cultural.\n\nFor example, as a Brit, what a country like Germany typically has for breakfast (cold meats and cheeses) seems odd to me.",
"A large portion of a cultural group choosing to eat it as a morning meal. That is about it. ",
"In many places, the defining characteristic of a breakfast food is that it can be cooked quickly with little or no preparation. Eggs and toast ate a great example, each takes about two minutes. ",
"That entirely depends on your culture, to be honest. Here in France, most breakfast foods are sweet (barring coffee, of course), and eggs or bacon would be strange."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5fy6w7 | what are the major sources of silicon valley capital, and in the event of a tech-bubble bursting, how will it affect the economy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5fy6w7/eli5what_are_the_major_sources_of_silicon_valley/ | {
"a_id": [
"dao0q44",
"daom7j9"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Almost all pre-IPO funding comes from wealthy individuals and institutions (e.g. pension funds, university endowments). Main street Mom and Pop are not [accredited investors](_URL_0_) and are unable to invest in those pre-IPO companies both directly and via funds. They have little direct exposure to pre-IPO Silicon Valley. \n\nAs for public companies, compared to the late 90s, companies now wait longer, are larger, and tend to be profitable before going public. Retail investors might lose some money on Alphabet (Google), Facebook, or Amazon in a downturn, but it wouldn't be like 2000.\n\ntl;dr - It would be bad for engineer salaries, Bay Area real estate, and some investors that have sufficient cushion to absorb the shock.",
"The major sources of Silicon Valley capital (and all tech startup capital) are: 1) wealthy individuals who invest in companies (sometimes referred to as Angel Investors); 2) venture capital firms (companies who manage venture capital funds - a pool of capital, generally from major institutions, endowments, and pension funds used for high-risk, high-yield investments in startup companies); and 3) initial public offerings (IPO - when a company sells stock on a public stock market). \n\nA bubble is when something becomes overvalued because people are buying it in the belief that it will be more valuable in the future. The last major tech-bubble (i.e. the dot-com bubble) resulted from people pouring money into public tech stocks. This huge volume of stock purchases drove stock prices to a point in which the total stock value of many tech companies was far in excess of that company's ability to generate a profit anywhere near what would be required to justify the stock value of the company. The dot-com bubble grew in the latter-half of the 90s and collapsed in the spring of 2000. \n\nWhat happened in the dot-com bubble is what would happen again - lots of people would lose a lot of money, those who made money from the bubble would seek other investments (like real estate, for example, setting the stage for the next bubble), and investment in the tech sector would tighten. This would mean that tech startup companies would have a harder time of raising capital, tech hiring as a result would slow, and the economy itself would likely experience some slowdown.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accredited_investor"
],
[]
] |
||
381byv | how do animals instinctually know how to swim but a 45 year old man that understands the logic can't? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/381byv/eli5_how_do_animals_instinctually_know_how_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"crrhy4i",
"crritw8"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"~~Every animal knows how to swim~~. Out of the womb, a human baby is able to swim before it can walk, even crawl. A 45 year old man who has not swam in 44 years, has lost the ability to swim because he has not practiced and cognitively, has forgotten how to. A lot of the reasoning behind not being able to swim is also fear, which causes panic - as opposed to physically not being able to swim.\n\nTLDR: Any animal can instinctively swim (including humans) at birth. Animals do not have to commit as much to the brain and will not forget how to.\n\n*EDIT: No I did not mean every animal in the animal kingdom. Animals similar to what OP is talking about.",
"Same way birds instinctively know how to make nests but humans have to learn how to build houses. Instinct is hard-wired onto a lesser part of your brain completely intact. Skills must be learned and results vary. Not everyone knows how to build a house or has what it takes. But skills are more beneficial than instinct in that they can adapt. If you cut a hole in the bottom of a bird's nest, it will keep laying eggs in it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
54o6hv | how are we supposed to know what the presidential candidates say during the debaters true? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/54o6hv/eli5_how_are_we_supposed_to_know_what_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"d83iead",
"d83iuhq",
"d83iy8i"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Different organizations are fact checking as the debates are happening. The New York Times is fact checking.\n\nDonald Trump did not want fact checking. That fact alone should give pause to anyone considering voting.",
"To quote a politician from several decades ago: \"Trust, but verify.\" \n\nMany organisations are fact-checking this debate in real-time. NPR, for example, is doing that, as are others. So you can trust NPR, but you should verify it by checking other sources, too. \n\nIn this day and age, verifying is extremely easy. ",
"You take the time to do research (and understand what it means to be a credible source), educating yourself on the issues and the facts surrounding the issues and don't rely on the candidates to tell the truth. That doesn't mean you assume they're always lying, it means being educated enough that you have a good general idea for when something sounds false, and looking anything up if you don't know. You have to follow the campaign early so you're already aware of the controversies and the responses. You have to be scientifically literate enough to know when something is physically impossible or impracticable. You have to go out of your way to meet and interact with and speak at length to people who are different than you so you know when candidates describe people that they are or more likely are not like that. You have to be skeptical of the party you support and verify what they have to say, and to consider opposing viewpoints and look into whatever merit they might have, and prepare yourself to understand their weaknesses before the debate. You have to accept that every issue is complex and requires more thought than the time allotted for sound bites to fully grasp and that often politicians are limited in the scope of the discussion, so that there could be nuances missing from the dialogue that affect the issue.\n\nTL;DR: Pretend it's a very important school assignment and do your homework and study for it like it's a test, because it is and failing means screwing up your country for years, possibly decades."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2pwnce | what are some film techniques used in movies and tv shows that give them that "professional" look that looks so much better than something filmed by just anyone? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pwnce/eli5_what_are_some_film_techniques_used_in_movies/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn0nhdg",
"cn0ofrp"
],
"score": [
2,
20
],
"text": [
"It's mainly lighting - you have no idea how much control goes into lighting a TV show or movie.\n",
"Hello, videographer here!\n\nThe \"professional\" look is called [production value](_URL_2_) and there are a lot of factors involved. The big one is [lighting.](_URL_3_) There are many types and colors and qualities of light and the best cinematographers spend a lifetime learning how to manipulate it and create beautiful shots. I think of it as \"painting\" a space with photons. Of course the angle of the shot can change a viewer's emotional reaction too. Want your character to seem tough or intimidating? Lower your camera and tilt up to them. Want them to seem meek and non-threatening? Raise it and tilt down.\n\nOf course this is all on-set work. Once you get to editing there's a completely new set of rules to play by. You can have gorgeous shots but bad timing and poorly placed cuts will ruin your film.\n\nEDIT: You asked for specific techniques and that's a tall order to explain with words. Here are some interesting tutorials and video essays I found useful:\n\n\nGENERAL:\n\n[Vimeo Video School](_URL_1_)\n\n\nSTORYTELLING:\n\n[Pixar's 22 Rules of Storytelling](_URL_0_)\n\n\nLIGHTING & CINEMATOGRAPHY:\n\n[Via Yale](_URL_7_)\n\n[Reverse Key Lighting](_URL_8_)\n\n\nEDITING:\n\n[Satoshi Kon: Editing Time & Space](_URL_5_)\n\n[The Cutting Edge](_URL_6_)\n\n\nEDIT 2: I hope these resources teach you as much as they've taught me. The best advice I can give you is *watch a lot of movies.* Start with the [last five years](_URL_4_) of nominees for best cinematography. Pay attention to how you feel and what you're thinking. Pause the film and try to figure out what about the shot makes you feel that way. **Everything you do is done to tell the story.** If your shot doesn't serve the story it doesn't belong in your film. Have fun and make great things!\n\n\nEDIT 3 (Haha): First gold! Thanks!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/a/fPLnM",
"http://vimeo.com/videoschool",
"http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/production_value",
"http://vimeo.com/57890592",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award_for_Best_Cinematography#2010s",
"http://vimeo.com/101675469",
"http://vimeo.com/47963215",
"http://classes.yale.edu/film-analysis/htmfiles/cinematography.htm",
"http://evanerichards.com/2012/2463"
]
] |
||
2f4vkp | why is using energy to spew hot air on our hands to dry them more green than using bio degradable paper towels? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2f4vkp/eli5_why_is_using_energy_to_spew_hot_air_on_our/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck5xvaq"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Think of the energy required to heat a few cubic feet of air some 10-20 degrees and move it through a fan. Now think of the energy required to chop down some trees in the middle of a forest, log them, transport them to a mill, chop them up, transport them to a grinder, grind them to paste, transport them to a paper factory, manufacture glue and similar paper making needs, transport that to the paper factory, manufacture paper, build plastic shrink wrap packaging, ship that to the paper factory, shrink wrap the paper, transport it to a distributor, then transport it to either a store or location of final use. Throw out the shrink wrap and the paper as you use it, and transport it to a landfill or recycling center, and recycle it. Repeat every time you run out of paper."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5ijdsk | what is a false vacuum, what causes them to collapse, and what are the odds of one destroying the universe? | I've heard the phrase false vacuum collapse a few times, and heard that if one were to occur it would make the entire universe cease to exist. What is one and what causes them to happen? Is it simply a theoretical possibility based on the math that is highly unlikely to happen, or is it a real thing that is likely to occur at some point? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ijdsk/eli5_what_is_a_false_vacuum_what_causes_them_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"db8l2zd"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"A false vacuum is like a ledge partway down a cliff. You're on the ledge, you think you're at the bottom. You aren't. Too much movement will see you off the ledge and fslling further, to the real bottom. \nThe universe is mostly empty space but some people think it's not as 'empty' as it could be, and the 'big bang' merely put us on the edge of the cliff. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4ypcma | how does keeping cut off body parts refrigerated make them last longer for reattachment? | Apologies if this question has already been asked. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ypcma/eli5_how_does_keeping_cut_off_body_parts/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6pevuu"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"It prevents the tissue from dying as quickly. When the part gets cut off, it stops receiving oxygen and nutrients from your blood stream. Our cells typically need an almost constant supply in order to remain functioning, so they start shutting down very quickly after getting cut off. However, cooling down the body part slows down cell metabolism, which means that it takes longer for them to use up their resources and start dying. Thus, by keeping it cold the tissue survives for longer, which gives the doctors more time to reattach the body part and get blood flowing through it again."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1wo6ya | what is the difference between a blue and purple link on reddit? (i'm colorblind) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1wo6ya/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_a_blue_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf3ujh6",
"cf3uk7y"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"A blue link is a link you have not clicked on. It turns purple when you click it or have previously visited the site. ",
"This is a web browser thing, not a reddit thing. Most web browsers will color links that aren't in your browser history as blue, and links that *are* in your browser history as purple.\n\nIf you're colorblind, you can probably modify the colors your browser uses for links to make this more obvious."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
29sust | when do police decide to stop investigating a case? | I understand that cases go cold and not everyone is solved. So, when the case gets hard and clues get fewer and far between. When do they decide to just stop looking? In the case of abductions and murders family member's emotions are high. So when do they police decide to just give up? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29sust/eli5_when_do_police_decide_to_stop_investigating/ | {
"a_id": [
"cio5ymy"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Police rarely just sit down and say \"we give up\". Instead, most investigations function on a \"when new things come in\" schedule. Once you've exhausted your current information and leads, you have to wait until something else (or someone else) provides new information. Until then, you work on a different case. If no new leads come in for a long time, then you likely won't be doing anything on that case for a long time. If things are constantly coming in, then you will be working that case every day.\n\nIf they get a good piece of information about something they haven't even looked at it 10 years, they will open it back up and see what new puzzle pieces they can fit together."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
10fkh5 | being shocked by wires. | What conditions have to be true for me to be shocked? If current is running through the wire and I touch it? If there is no current and I'm holding it and then I let go? If I'm floating? Why do I get shocked, and how can I "avoid" it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10fkh5/eli5_being_shocked_by_wires/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6d1gg8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Electricity is all about charge. Charge moves from high voltage to low voltage. The bigger the difference in voltage, the more the charge wants to go from high to low voltage. Charge will always follow the path of least resistance. If charges are moving, you get a current. Current is what you feel as a 'zap'. What is called 'ground' is a low voltage. \n\nTo be shocked, current has to flow through your body. That means, your body acts as a conductor between high voltage and low voltage. If you are touching a voltage source (like a live wire) and the ground, that voltage will zap right through your body, heating it up via resistive heating and cooking you like a roast pig. However, it only does that as a last resort.\n\nCharges follow the path of least resistance, and your body has a fair amount of resistance. This means that it takes a lot of voltage to get the amount of current required to kill you. Bottom line is, the more resistance you have to a low voltage, the less current goes through your body, the less 'zap' you get.\n\nSo, your scenarios.\n**If you touch a voltage source:** If it's high enough voltage (usu 100s of volts), it will zap you, like you can feel it. This is why if you touch both ends of a 1.5V AA battery, you don't feel anything; the voltage is to low to get any current.\n\n**If current is running through the wire:** *You're mostly safe.* Charges follow the path of least resistance. If current is flowing through the wire, it means that there is already a really easy way for those charges to travel and don't want to have anything to do with your body. It's difficult for them to go through you, but easy for them to keep on going through the wire. \n\n**If you touch a voltage source while floating:** You're fine until you hit the ground. Your body 'absorbs' the charge of the voltage source, but can't discharge it anywhere in the air (if the voltage were higher than the breakdown voltage of the air, you'd get lightning). Once you hit the ground, your body is a great conductor to discharge all that charge, you get a current, and then you get zapped.\n\nTL;DR Current kills you, your body is very resistive, requires very high resistances to impede current."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1pupy3 | why does my cat find rubber bands, plastic bags etc, so tasty. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pupy3/eli5_why_does_my_cat_find_rubber_bands_plastic/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd6b77t"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"And nail files"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9ro9hz | what is the difference between dolby digital and dolby atmos? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ro9hz/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_dolby_digital/ | {
"a_id": [
"e8iflfj"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"Dolby Digital (DD) has multiple sound channels digitally encoding into the audio stream. Basic DD is 5.1, which **must** be left, right, center, left-surround, right-surround, and subwoofer. DD EX adds a 6th channel in the center back. All of these channels are supposed to be at ear level when sitting.\n\nAtmos allows for much greater variety and 3D spatial sound. It can have up to 128 audio tracks, and also has extra information about where those tracks should exist in the listening space. You can more or less install tons of speakers all over the room — the standard Dolby locations, speakers higher up on the walls, speakers all over the ceiling, whatever. The receiver/amplifier is programmed to know where all of these speakers are, and uses the audio source information to send all of the right audio to the right speakers. As a result, you end up with sound actually surrounding you — you can hear the rainfall, helicopters flying overhead, whatever the studio wants you to hear — as if you were really there.\n\nEdit: Whereas normal surround sound systems are usually 5.1, 6.1, or 7.1 (5, 6, or 7 speakers plus a subwoofer), Atmos is notated like 5.1.4 (5 standard surround speakers, 1 sub, and 4 Atmos speakers) or 7.2.6 (7 standard surrounds, 2 subwoofers, and 6 Atmos speakers)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8zrabs | why do vehicles in 4wd have a larger turning radius than when they’re in 2wd/rwd? | When my truck is in 4WD mode, I can’t turn as tight as I could when my truck is in RWD mode; what changes that would cause this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8zrabs/eli5_why_do_vehicles_in_4wd_have_a_larger_turning/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2kvcst",
"e2l1jq9",
"e2l4bgk"
],
"score": [
26,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Your truck likely lacks a center differential\n\nDifferentials allow wheels to rotate at different speeds. A rear differential is important for allowing you to go around corners as the outside wheel needs to spin faster than the inside wheel. If you had a locked rear differential you'd have to cause the outside wheel to slip to make corners at any reasonable speed\n\nOn 4WD vehicles with a transfer case that lacks a center differential, the average speed of the front two wheels must be the same as the average speed of the back two wheels because there is no differential to allow the two axles to rotate at different speeds. This results in poor cornering performance because a tight corner always has the rear wheels covering more distance than the front wheels",
"There's a difference between 4WD and AWD.\n\nAWD, short for All Wheel Drive, or \"All the Wheels, All the Time\" is typically a permanent feature. It cannot be engaged or disengaged. It is computer controlled and aims to improve traction, especially in adverse weather conditions.\n\nSome AWD vehicles use couplings to bias torque between the two drive axles while others use a center differential. The center differential permits the two drive axles (one front, one rear) to rotate at different speeds.\n\nAll drive axles have differentials. A differential permits the wheels to move at different angular velocities, which happens whenever a vehicle turns. The wheel on the outside of the turn rotates faster than the wheel on the inside of the turn. The rotational speed of the input shaft to the differential is the average of the rotational speed of both output shafts (one shaft to each wheel).\n\nThe existence of a centre differential permits all four wheels to move at different speeds, allowing for tight turning while maintaining power to all four wheels.\n\n4WD is a feature on many trucks and off-road vehicles. Unlike AWD, 4WD typically must be selectively engaged and disengaged. It is not a full time feature.\n\nAlso unlike AWD, 4WD does not have a center differential. What 4WD has instead is a transfer box. A transfer box is an auxiliary gearbox which splits torque between both drive axles evenly. Most 4WD vehicles have 3 or 4 options:\n\n2HI: The vehicle is in its normal 2 wheel drive mode with all torque going to only one drive axle. On full size trucks this is almost always the rear axle. On some medium size trucks it may be the front axle.\n\n4HI; The vehicle is in 4 wheel drive mode with torque split evenly between both drive axles. Each drive axle has a differential which permits the wheels on each axle to move at different speeds with respect to that axle. **However, the average of the angular velocity of the front two wheels must be very close to the average of the angular velocity of the rear two wheels. Each differential permits only a small amount of slip.** If these averages are not the same, the wheels will bind until one axle slips causing the wheels to spin. This is bad and can cause damage to the power train. When taking a tight corner, the rear wheels travel more than the front wheels, causing this to happen.\n\n4LO: This is the same as 4HI but with the addition of a reducing gear. This allows the engine to operate at a higher RPM for a given wheel speed, delivering more torque to the wheel without causing it to spin out and lose traction.\n\n4Auto: Present on some newer vehicles, the vehicle will switch between 2HI and 4HI automatically as required.\n\nThe bold part above is why your turning radius sucks when 4WD is engaged. Although they accomplish some of the same objectives, AWD and 4WD do not have the same goals.\n\nAWD is primarily intended for improving ride safety by providing 4 full time control surfaces. This is excellent for dealing with hazardous weather.\n\n4WD is primarily intended for navigating off-road or climbing over obstacles. Peak climbing and off-road navigation is reached when all four control surfaces are locked together. In fact, many modern full size pickups feature electronic locking differentials which will lock the differentials (forcing the output axles to rotate at the same velocity) which forces all four control surfaces to rotate at the same velocity.",
"A bit off topic but still related: On my F150, once 4Hi or 4Lo is enables I hear/feel hard “clunk” when turning. Is that normal or is there something not right?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4x2su8 | why aren't we concerned with bacteria, viruses, and other microorganisms developing resistance to alcohol, chlorine, and other substances used to sterilize medical equipment (and hands)? | I was on a tour of a hospital a few years ago, led by a department head, and we were asked at various points to use the hand sanitizers, which we did. At one point I asked, "Are you at all concerned about bacteria developing resistance to this stuff, given how often you use it?" He laughed off the question as if it were almost silly. Was it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4x2su8/eli5_why_arent_we_concerned_with_bacteria_viruses/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6bxq95",
"d6bxxj5",
"d6by6u5",
"d6byap0"
],
"score": [
9,
10,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Resistance to antibiotics is realistic, because they work with cleverly shaped molecules, like a key in a lock.\n\nResistance to these other things is not realistic, it's like developing a resistance to bullets or to fire. They work by brute force, so resistance isn't a thing.",
"It is a good question. The answer is how it works on the organism. Anti-biotics work by interfering with some important function of a bacteria cell. Think of throwing a wrench into a machine and watching it gum up the works. Cells that have different machine arrangements can be more resistant to wrenches. They'll have casings around important stuff or gears that can allow a wrench to slip through the teeth without stopping. Maybe they have extra redundant machines.\n\n\nAlcohol, chlorine and copper work by physically dismantling the machine. No amount of changing the machine will help when you shown up with a screw driver and start removing things. ",
"The ways which we sterilize things are often overkill on a level far above that of things like antibiotics.\n\nAntibiotics and similar substances are extremely targeted chemicals which work on very specific parts of a virus or bacteria's function to kill it because they are going into your body and the idea is to kill the bacteria without killing you. Because the effects of antibiotics etc are so targeted, it only requires a minor evolutionary change to become resistant.\n\nWith sterilization you have the luxury of not having to worry about the human that the bacteria other things are inside, so you can use much more lethal and powerful methods of killing that contamination.\n\nThink of sterilization like a nuclear weapon and antibiotics like the Black Plague with humans. With some very minor evolution it wouldn't be too difficult for humans to develop a resistance the Black Plague. Yet it would be much harder for humans to develop a biological resistance to being incinerated by a nuclear bomb. \n\nSterilizing medical equipment works the same way, most of the methods used to sterilize things kill all life, and would probably kill a person if applied in a sufficient dose. ",
"Antibiotics have a very narrow action - they generally interfere with the function of a single, specific type of molecule (usually an enzyme) in the bacteria, which is vital for them. If the shape of that molecule changes a little, the bacteria become immune to the antibiotic.\n\nThings like chlorine or alcohol, on the other hand, have a very simple chemical mode of action. They chemically disrupt a lot of different parts of the bacteria, so that a lot of things would need to change at once to give resistance.\n\nAnd as for why antibiotics don't use those broad mechanisms as well? The broad mechanisms work against your cells just as well, and the goal of an antibiotic is generally to kill the bacteria without killing the patient."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2591ea | why are hamburgers generally thought of as unhealty? they contain everything on the food pyramid, grains (bun), veggies (lettuce), fruit (tomatoes), dairy (cheese), and meat (beef patty). | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2591ea/eli5_why_are_hamburgers_generally_thought_of_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"chevbjx",
"chevct4",
"chewsj1",
"chf27dw",
"chf2l40",
"chf3d6s",
"chf45rj",
"chf59fq",
"chf5by5",
"chf5f4a",
"chf5fty",
"chf5nw2",
"chf5s49",
"chf5ubp",
"chf68fz",
"chf6awy",
"chf7a0s",
"chfb7ji"
],
"score": [
56,
188,
2,
18,
3,
17,
2,
31,
2,
4,
3,
3,
2,
10,
5,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"High fat content from the beef and cheese, refined carbs from the bun, iceberg lettuce has almost no nutritional content....and there isn't much of it, and general high caloric content from large serving sizes.",
"It's not balanced. A properly \"balanced\" hamburger would probably have half the bun, a quarter of the meat, five times as much veggies, and like barely any cheese at all. There's also no fruit, so you're missing those.",
"1. the ratios are bad. If the hamburger is your meal, the greens to meat ratio is horrible in this one.\n\n2. the typical bun is not whole grains - it's processed (and sweetened).\n\n3. the meat isn't great - typical ground chuck is 20% fat. Further, 3oz is about what you'd need and that'd be a tiny burger.\n\n4. ketchup has a bunch of sugar in it.\n\nThey are much more delicious than they are healthy.\n\n",
"Is the food pyramid an accurate suggestion for a healthy human lifestyle, or is it providing for profit share between the various industries producing those listed products?",
"The quality and quantity if each is wrong.",
"i think the food pyramid is out of date / unbalanced ",
"I've always thought of a hamburger as the perfect meal. The meat is the entree, the veggies are a side salad and the bun is your bread. It's just conveniently put together to make one item.",
"Ask 10 nutritionists what you're supposed to eat. You'll get 10 different answers.",
"Unbalanced, as already mentioned. Also, things like ketchup, mustard, mayonnaise, B & B sauce, lots of cheese, French fries really throw the balance off even more. As a kid I was a picky eater, and only had my hamburger on a plain whole wheat bun. Little did I know I was making healthy choices.",
"If you make a hamburger yourself, it can be perfectly healthy.\nIf you eat a fast-food hamburger it's unhealthy for many obvious reasons caused by companies maximizing profits.",
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad. ",
"Its not thought of as unhealthy. Whats unhealthy is the size and quantity that most people eat. If eaten in moderation and coupled with a side of veggies and fruit, a hamburger is essentially a decently balance meal all in one. ",
"I think although burgers could be changed to accommodate the pyramid better, it's also the stigma of what you eat WITH the burger that leads to it being thought of as unhealthy. The large coke and large fries, maybe wash it down with a shake are completely unhealthy, so places like McDonalds get a bad rap for \"unhealthy\" food even though you may go in with the goal of getting just a burger. ",
"these guys are all idiots. hamburgers are fine. it's the huge-ass soft-drink and the fries that are bad for you.",
"The food pyramid is bad, it's developed by the Dept of Agriculture, not the Dept of Health. The USDA is in bed with corporations and their priorities are helping them make profits, they don't give a shit what's heathy nor would they know anyway.",
"There are no unhealthy foods just unhealthy diets",
"Hamburgers aren't really necessarily unhealthy, but in practice they tend to be. First, if you cook it very well done you will cook off a lot of the fat in the meat and then it will be healthier, but the tastiest burgers are cooked medium-rare and are quite juicy, which means there is a lot more fat than you need. Second, sauces like ketchup, barbeque sauce and mayonnaise are all pretty unhealthy, ketchup and barbeque are loaded with sugar and mayonnaise is basically just oil. Cheese is also high in fat. Third, people tend to eat burgers with other unhealthy foods, like fries or onion rings.\n\nIt's a lot like the Subway \"under 6 grams of fat\" claim for a lot of their sandwiches. A sandwich with lean meat, lots of vegetables and no condiments is pretty healthy. Add cheese, oil and vinegar, mayonnaise, etc. and it becomes less and less healthy. \n\nA whopper with no ketchup, cheese or mayonnaise is actually not that bad for you and a good source of protein, although the bun still has way too many carbs for it to be \"good\" for you.",
"Your hamburger may contain the same items, but they are not in the same ratio as in the food pyramid (which is worthless anyway).\n\n\nThere is nothing wrong with saturated fat from animals. It's what we evolved eating. Some suspect that the saturated fats from grass-fed animals is healthier than that from grain fed animals. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7ge1e2 | why is hand sanitizer not effective against c-diff bacteria? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ge1e2/eli5_why_is_hand_sanitizer_not_effective_against/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqicnww",
"dqj3hqu",
"dqjbre9"
],
"score": [
12,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Some types of bacteria, like *C. difficile*, are able to go into a state of suspended animation by [forming spores](_URL_0_). These are different from fungus spores, but we call them that anyway. \n\nWhile in spore form, the bacteria aren't doing anything. They can't eat or reproduce. The upside is that they are pretty much unkillable, and can wake back up when they encounter the right conditions. ",
"Alcohol won't kill the spores. Even hand-washing doesn't always work. Recommendation is to wear gloves when dealing with someone with a C. difficile infection.",
"Use strongcide from _URL_0_ : its an clinical grade over the counter anti microbial that is the only FDA approved product that kills C-diff, MRSA, staph, impetigo, and ALL other superbugs on contact. Essentially it’s the hand sanitizers that kills the .01% that hand sanitizer doesn’t- which is actually all the harmful bacteria "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://micro.cornell.edu/research/epulopiscium/bacterial-endospores"
],
[],
[
"www.strongholdtechnologies.com"
]
] |
||
1a5mos | how do we know so much about north korea's military arsenal? | Considering how closed off North Korea is to the rest of the world, how do we "know" what their military is like and that they haven't developed very successful nuclear weapons? I saw [this post](_URL_0_) and I don't see how that could be accurate at all. It's not like NK sends an annual memo out to the world with their military statistics. Which makes me also wonder, how do we know the military capacity of all the other countries as well -- do they share that info?
Sorry, I know this is like the 100th NK post. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1a5mos/eli5_how_do_we_know_so_much_about_north_koreas/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8uafh6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Espionage, sources inside the country who leak to us, spies, satellites, talking with other countries closer to NK, etc. \n\nWe do have an entire organization devoted to knowing things we are not supposed to know, the CIA are not just for show ;) "
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/1a5c3e/til_that_north_korea_has_less_firepower_than/"
] | [
[]
] |
|
1v9p4i | how do micro-transaction games make decent profit? | It just seems to me that not many people would pay such small amounts for lots of things. It seems to be the norm for a lot of the games industry to offer free to play games that are supported by MTs such as Project Spark. I would never pay for access to a certain item or anything of the sort. I know some people must pay but it confuses me to no end. This is where you come in, Reddit! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v9p4i/how_do_microtransaction_games_make_decent_profit/ | {
"a_id": [
"ceq2o7x",
"ceq2r8f",
"ceq2ugt",
"ceq4znj"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You would be surprised how many ppl would buy those items, may it to look cooler, or just to support the game itself. It does work quite well, otherwise you wouldn't see huge micro transaction games like LoL and Dota. I've seen lots of people buying \"treasure keys\" for more than 200$. So after all the system works pretty damn well. ",
"If you have a huge player base it only takes a tiny fraction of the users to pay a tiny amount it adds up quickly. These freemium games often have lower production cost and quality then big payed games. ",
"Gaming works like an addiction. Which addiction depends on which game, but overall, the best game designers are like bartenders for the human mind. \n\nWith free to pay games, the idea is to give you just tiny drips, enough to inspire you to torture yourself. The difficulty will be spiked to \"I am a speed run God.\", and the money/experience drops will be so small that it'll look like a punishment for pirates. \n\nWhen you have some spare money, you're suddenly empowered to take ahold of your dealer, and say \"Give me a fucking cup, asshole.\" and play the actual fucking game as it was meant to be played. \n\nAnd if you're stupid or naive', this will make you feel empowered. You might even get drunk on that power, because it's fun to go shopping.\n\nThe only problem (from the point of view of the market) is that there's way too much competition for this sort of thing, since anyone with decent artistic talent and game design skills can make a good casual game...or at least, one that doesn't immediately crash on the user. \n\nWith that kind of high bar for quality, and with AAA companies becoming increasingly confused about the meaning of the words \"micro\", or \"not making your contempt for your customers obvious.\", we're about due for a market correction...",
"When a game is sufficiently fun, and has mechanics that let you spend money to have more fun faster... \n\nFor example, clash of clans is amazingly fun, but has a time based build system (that can be sped up using money). With millions of people playing it, if even 1% of the player base spent $10 like I did, that's millions of dollars of profit. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.