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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
9jk1k4 | how do hippos move so quickly through water? | They don't have fins, tails or anything that would seem to be able to propel them at the speeds I have seen (just stumpy elephant-like feet). | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9jk1k4/eli5_how_do_hippos_move_so_quickly_through_water/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6s5xca",
"e6sy4kp"
],
"score": [
13,
3
],
"text": [
"They run on the bottom.\n\nIn shallow waters (which they usually make their home in) Hippos don't as much swim when they are moving fast as they gallop on the ground. Their buoyancy means that they can run in ways that would be impossible on land and their muscles and mass mean that they can get up to quite a high velocity and don't have to worry as much about being slowed down by the water resistance.\n\nThey can also swim, but hippos are at their most deadly when they cam move by running on the ground in water and on land.",
"In addition to others mentioning about running under water: The main culprit that slows bodies down under water is wigliness. Olympic swimmers wear tight clothing for this reason to reduce drag. It has to do something with the amount of energy lost for breaking the hydrogen bonds to part water is similar to energy gained by bonding them together again. So a hard body moving through water gains on the backside of the direction of its movement energy back that a wobbly body would not be able to retain. Because the retained energy would get lost to temporarily deform the body to accomodate the energy. Since hard bodies can't deform, they are propelled forward by rebonding water molecules. The stiffness of bodies in water thus make a huge difference in gaining and retaining speed. Hippos have (in relation to humans, elephants etc) harder/stiffer bodies like dolphines or fish. That seem to be a reason they can run so fast under water."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
19ieyj | what did george bush do that makes so many people dislike him? | I've always wanted to know | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/19ieyj/eli5_what_did_george_bush_do_that_makes_so_many/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8ob405",
"c8oclno",
"c8ocz4i",
"c8on2xj"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"George Bush did a number of bad things during his presidency. He failed to achieve success in the War in Afghanistan. One main cause of this was his decision to invade Iraq; a decision that was made based on unreliable intelligence and a lack of international support. The combination of these wars and large tax decreases caused the deficit to increase substantially.",
"Better question is if all the people hated things when George Bush did it, why do they seem fine with it when Barack Obama does it. There is little difference between the two. Bush gave tax cuts....Obama has done the same while increasing spending. Bush started a war on shaky knowledge and without public approval....Obama has secretly killed American citizens in foreign countries violating treaties, and armed Mexican drug cartels (all while asking Americans to hand over their guns). I will probably only ever vote for independent candidates for the rest of my life. Better to be part of the losing team than to be part of the problem. I don't mean to stir up controversy either, but it bugs the hell out of me. And I can't imagine how it looks to the rest of the world.",
"Generally he was an embarrassing figurehead seen by non-Americans like myself as arrogant, ignorant and dogmatic. His duality of good vs evil came across as a man with little grasp of the complexities of international relations.\n\nIn reality, George Bush Jnr was merely a pawn used by his father, Cheney, Rumsfeld etc. They knew that they could get away with doing some really fucked up shit and pass it off as bumbling errors and incompetence when really most of it was premeditated and deliberate.\n\nWhat am I talking about?\n\nWar in middle east (justification, WMD, no link to 911, where in the world was Bin Laden, 3000 US soldiers dead for what?\nPatriot Act,\nGuantanamo Bay,\nNational Debt,\nGlobal Financial Crisis.\n\nThe list goes on.\n\nAll, is usually not at it seems.\n",
"Everyone here has some great answers. Let's also remember that Bush started his first term already hated. There were many questions about who really won the election in Florida. Many people claim that Bush used family's political influence to \"steal\" the election. This is debatable but many people resented Bush because of it. Most people agree that while Gore did win the popular vote, Bush won the electoral vote. The election was very close however. \n\nBesides the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and the bad economy, many people felt that Bush catered too much to the Religious Right and Big Business. Many people felt that Bush was stupid and only got to where he was because of nepotism. His numerous linguistic errors, called [Bushisms](_URL_0_), didn't help him. People didn't like his \"cowboy\" persona much and felt he was a phony. \n\nI'm from New Haven, CT. George Bush was born here. When he was first elected, the \"Welcome To Connecticut\" signs on the highway at the state's borders were changed to \"Welcome to Connecticut: Birthplace of George W. Bush\". A week later someone spray-painted \"We apologize!\".\n\nIf you want to see a fairly unbiased portrayal of Bush, watch the film *W*. It's fictional but Josh Brolin does an excellent job showing what Bush must have gone through. \n\nOn another note, [this picture](_URL_1_) always makes me laugh.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushism",
"http://disruptthenarrative.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/georgebush-missmeyet.jpg"
]
] |
|
7joarj | how do heat sinks like the ones on cpus work ? | You put some paste on the cpu and then slap a huge aluminum(?) block with some copper tubes and a fan attached to it and all of a sudden it won’t melt anymore. Magic ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7joarj/eli5_how_do_heat_sinks_like_the_ones_on_cpus_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"dr7wbwo",
"dr7ybsn",
"dr8bgep",
"dr8wrk9"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"The thermal paste acts as a thermally conductive filler. As the surface of the heat sink base and CPU lid aren't perfectly smooth, air bubbles would otherwise form, and trapped air is an extremely poor conductor of heat. \n\nThe general idea of a heatsink is that heat passively flows from hot to cold. In this case, the hottest part is the CPU package, and the fins are passively or actively cooled by air. ",
"heat moves between two localities to move towards equilibrium. \n\nthe CPU is really hot like 150+F. the heatsink is less hot like 120F. the CPU heatsink dissipates heat into an even bigger heatsink: your room's atmosphere where it's like 70-80ish F. and your room atmosphere mixes with your home's atmosphere which mixes with open air atmosphere.",
"Heat transfer is proportional to surface area & the material you're transferring to. It's *much* easier to transfer heat into aluminum than it is into air. Since the face of the CPU is very small, you want to hook it up to something that'll take as much heat as possible. The heatsink then creates a *lot* of area to contact the air, making it practical to dissipate the heat.",
"A heatsink is designed to increase the surface area of the object that needs to be cooled. \n\nMetal and water are great thermal conductors, but air isn't. So you create an object to spread the heat load more evenly and make contact with as much air as possible. You can do this with a big metal plate, which is what a lot of low power mobile devices use. For more serious cooling though, you use fins. \n\nThin metal fins are allow you to create a lot of surface area without drastically increasing size of the heat sink. We then attach a fan so hot air is pushed out and a continuous stream of cool air is run past the fins. \n\nThe copper tubes attached to some heatsinks are heat pipes. They contain a small amount of liquid. When this liquid hits the hot conductive metal plate on top of the CPU, it vapourizes, and naturally gravitates to the cooler end of the pipe, where the cooling fins are. It then condenses back into a liquid and repeats the cycle. This is somewhat similar to how a refrigerator works, except this process is entirely passive. You can also kick it up a notch to liquid cooling, which uses flowing water as the heat transfer medium.\n\nNeither traditional finned heatsinks or water cooling can cool a chip lower than the ambient air temperature though. For that you have to go to exotic cooling methods like phase change (an active refrigeration cycle), dry ice, or liquid nitrogen. None of which are really practical. \n\nThe paste is thermally conductive ceramic compound. Sometimes mixed in with a small amount of metal that's exceptionally conductive, like silver. It fills in imperfections on the CPU and heatsink, to make the best contact and eliminate hot spots. These hot spots can damage the chip, so processor heat sink should never been installed without it. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2nmv7w | - since very device is a bit different than other in matter of consuming electricity how do they standardized power supplies | For example we see 5 v 12 v 19 v power supplies but not 7 v or 11 v. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nmv7w/eli5_since_very_device_is_a_bit_different_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmf0mk9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They design the device to use a specific plug and work around its capacity or change it to a higher capacity plug. Or in the last case they build a proprietary plug "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
12ym59 | if silicon conducts better when it heats up, why does my computer work better when it's cold? | So, basically, the parts inside my computer are made of mainly metal, and semi-conductors like silicon, I know that much. But, the thing is, my computer works better when it's cold. But I know that a semi-conductor works better when it is heated up. So, logically, my computer should run faster and better whenever it is hot.
Although I know that's not the case. If my computer gets hot, it slows to a crawl and starts chugging and whining. Why is this? Why does my Computer work better when it's cold, yet the material that the parts are made from works better when it's hot? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/12ym59/eli5_if_silicon_conducts_better_when_it_heats_up/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6z8gse",
"c6za2ru",
"c6zxw3i"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > So, logically, my computer should run faster and better whenever it is hot.\n\nFirstly, just because you speed up the speed at which charge is conducted in each part as a function of temperature does not mean it will just magically run better. Some of the systems require being at the same frequency or careful multiples of each other for timing issues. If you allow parts to heat unevenly, they change their properties unevenly.\n\nSecondly, how are you getting your computer hot? Unless you're comparing times where it's in a warm room versus when it's in a cool room, and controlling for other factors, it's likely the difference in heat was caused by your computer working harder and doing something like repeated disk use or heavy computation - which would cause those other effects, too.",
"Silicon is a semiconductor, therefore it is used only in logical gates (aka chips use silicon, tranzistors are made of it).\n\nEverything else (the wires transmitting the data) is some other conductor (not semiconductor).\n\nThe entire point of silicon is that it must not conduct too much electricity, this semiconductor property is the key to how tranzistors work, because this somehow (I forgot the details) allows to represents a logical 0 or 1 based on the voltage passed through, so for example from 0 to 2 volts means a logical 0, 3-5 volts means logical 1, notice that the values from 2 to 3 volts are undefined, this is where the value passes from 0 < - > 1 and as far as I remember you need a semicondutor for that.",
"The *problem* is that silicon conducts more when it is hot. It's not a benefit, it's a drawback. In a computer, silicon transistors are used to create circuits that put transistors in a state of conduction that is mostly \"on\" or mostly \"off\", so that they can be used to represent the binary numbers 1 and 0. But heat makes them all conduct more, even the ones we are trying to turn \"off\". We call that extra current \"leakage\". \n \nSince even the \"off\" transistors are leaking when the circuit is hot, it is more difficult to tell the difference between a 0 and a 1. That difference is the \"operating margin\", or it could be described as the \"signal to noise ratio\". Any way you describe it, it is bad when the difference is too small. \n \nA related issue is \"thermal runaway\". Since a hot part uses more power, and more power makes parts hot, you can get into a situation where a very hot part like a CPU or GPU gets hotter and hotter until it self-destructs. To prevent this, the computer will speed up the fans that are cooling those parts, but eventually it will just have to shut down the power. It might do this somewhat gracefully, or it might not. \n \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4n39q7 | why do automobiles/vehicles get taxed multiple times as they are bought & resold? ( | Was wondering why vehicles are taxed multiple times? I was under the impression that usually things are in place such that sales tax is not collected on the same item twice?
For instance I recently bought a used car which had 3 previous owners (dealer/trade-in) which means that just this car alone has had 4 payments just in taxes... Which are quite a lot.
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4n39q7/eli5_why_do_automobilesvehicles_get_taxed/ | {
"a_id": [
"d40iz06"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"If you go to a used book store, they'll charge you sales tax. That's the same as charging sales tax on a used car.\n\nIf you buy a used book from your friend, they (likely) won't charge you tax, because that was a grey market transaction. Cars are hard to sell grey market because they have to be registered."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3mzgc6 | syria and what the hell has/ is going on | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mzgc6/eli5syria_and_what_the_hell_has_is_going_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvjphw1",
"cvjpv23",
"cvjt8dt",
"cvjw9cf",
"cvk8xhj"
],
"score": [
9,
38,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The US funded anti-assad \"moderates\" who turned into ISIL.\n\nTurkey continues funding ISIL by maintaining an open border for them whilst simultaneously bombing the only people fighting them, anarchist Kurds.\n\nMeanwhile Israel is bombing Syrian targets. The west blamed Assad for ISIL's use of chemical weapons. And the whole of reddit is censoring all this.\n\nFuck you moderators.",
"It's more complicated than this but to EL5 it:\n\nin 2011 civil war broke after a few months of protests, followed by months of civil disobedience that was violently put down, especially during the Arab spring, between government and a rebel group called the Syrian Free army made up of former syrian military mostly.\n\nThis being the middle east, previous bad blood and complicated politics split syria up into many factions, including the Kurds in the north, ISIL in the east, the recognized government in the west, and a bunch of other groups. Just about everyone has been accused of horrible human rights abuses, but because ISIL is holding the oil and gas producing sections of the country and threatening to halt exports, they have gotten the majority of the west's attention during this conflict. \n\nThe government is still nominally in control of the country, controlling about 60% of the current population, but lost a lot of oil and gas fields to ISIL.\n\nDuring most of this time but getting worse over the past 6 months many Syrians have been deciding that they had had enough and left the country, precipitating the current refugee crisis in europe. Syria borders Iraq, which is mired in its own civil war at the moment so is not a popular emigration target, Israel which is not very Muslim friendly for whatever reason, Turkey and Jordan both of which has seen huge *huge* amounts of people claiming refugee status. The camps there have filled up and economic conditions in the camps are terrible so people are leaving the camps and travelling to european nations, mostly germany at the moment. \n\nA few words about this: a refugee is someone who is offered temporary residence in a foreign country due to fear of persecution in their own country. They remain refugees until they either return to their own country or get asylum in their destination country, which grants them permanent residence. 1.5 million syrians left the country since january, bring the total since civil war started, 3.9 million since civil war was declared, and this is showing no signs of slowing, and the war is showing no signs of ending.\n\nIt's a pretty shitty situation overall. ",
"basically the us and nato want to have a gas pipe line running from the middle east, specifically Qatar i believe, up to europe through syria, to replace the russian one, because that would fuck russia over, but syria being a friend of russia and wont fuck them over like that so they refused, so syrian rebels got quite the boost from nato nations and thing erupted into full on civil war, with the rebels getting continuous support even though they are basically muslim extremists and would be way worse for the country then assad ever could, not that hes exactly a good guy. so anyway now we have groups like isis and shit being backed by the us , who refuses to take any action beyond the most minimal effort to contain them, wreaking havok, and now russia is stepping in saying theyre going to help assad fight all these extremist groups and hopefully bring stability back to syria while saving their own economy ",
"Everybody is fighting everybody else and smashing up the country in the process. \nOver in this corner we have the regime which is being backed openly by Russia pretty much guaranteeing that it won't fall any time soon.\nIn the other corner is the FSA who are being supplied by the U.S. with modern anti-tank missiles plus captured vehicles giving them enough firepower to cause all kinds of hell, but not enough to win.\nIn another corner we have ISIS, ISIL, Da'esh, whatever you want to call them. They have done a wonderful job of pissing off damn near everybody in the world as they try to carve out their hard line Islamic state. \nIn yet another corner we have the Kurds who are trying to make their own country, Kurdistan a reality. This would mean taking territory from Turkey, Syria, Da'esh and Iraq and none of them are having that.\nAnd over there we find the various Islamic brigades who only really share the desire for a Syria based on Sunni Islam. They can be found shooting at the FSA, the Syrian Army, Da'esh or each other depending on the day.\nTL;DR it's a giant cluster fuck with no end in sight.",
"_URL_1_\n\nThis cleared it up for me very well. \n\nYou might also want to take a look at this: _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/KVV6_1Sef9M",
"https://youtu.be/RvOnXh3NN9w"
]
] |
||
4ri3b9 | what is pokemon go? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ri3b9/eli5_what_is_pokemon_go/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5198z9",
"d519cr5",
"d5501ix"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"You're basically using your phone to turn the world in pokemon. Using your camera and internal sensors, you can find pokemon and capture them. Different parts of the world will have different pokemon ",
"Think of a standard Pokemon game. Now, instead of simply moving your character around with a d-pad, *you* are the one moving around in the physical space, and you can track and see Pokemon through [augmented reality](_URL_0_). You can battle any other person who also has the app installed. I'm pretty sure there are 'gym' battles in major landmarks.",
"How about you stop removing interesting topics? I specifically looked to ELI5 to see what this is all about. Great explanation, augmented reality. Then you go and shut it down. C'mon!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augmented_reality"
],
[]
] |
||
2r184d | why are most of the top college sports schools state schools? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2r184d/eli5_why_are_most_of_the_top_college_sports/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnbgja4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because most large colleges are public schools.\n\nWhile there are more private colleges than public ones, a very large percentage of those are small liberal arts or religious colleges that don't have significant sports programs."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2nlvsc | days of the week names | Howdy howdy redditors, today I was discussing with a friend as to the reasons behind the names of the days of the week, i.e. Thursday = Thor's day, also the same in German, Donnerstag from Donner (lightning). So I was wondering if someone could explain why? And also for other languages if possible too. Thanks, Will.
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nlvsc/eli5_days_of_the_week_names/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmeqyjs"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"AFAIK: \n\nMonday=Moon Day\n\nTuesday=Tiwaz (god of the sky) Day\n\nWednesday= Wodan(AKA Odin) Day\n\nThursday= Thor Day\n\nFriday= Freya Day\n\nSaturday= Saturns Day\n\nSunday= Sun Day "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2wfcw0 | how is it that my cable/internet/phone provider can cram 200+ hd channels, a low latentcy 25+ mbps internet connection, and a phone line into a single coaxial cable while i still have to use complicated (multiple wires within one wire) hdmi, cat5/6, or phone cables? | Wouldn't connecting stuff be so much simpler if all it took was a single A/V style cable? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wfcw0/eli5_how_is_it_that_my_cableinternetphone/ | {
"a_id": [
"coqaivd",
"coqau6c"
],
"score": [
5,
9
],
"text": [
"It would be more complicated for the electronics to understand. As long as you can transmit bits and bytes you don't have any problems. But the other things you mention use more elaborate ways of transmitting information. The result is usually that they require special transmitters and receivers, which tend to cost money, consume energy and take up space - nothing you really want. \n\n\nSo basically using multiple cables is a lot simpler than using just one cable. \n\n\nAnd to get back to your question, how can connection things become simpler? All you need to to is plug it in, nowadays all of them are made rather foolproof. I don't think it's even possible to plug in anything wrong. Usually it just won't fit. Making all cables look like A/V cables would probably make it harder.",
"The simple answer is: decoding and compatibility.\n\nA signal is encoded at the cable company, transmitted along the coaxial line as data, and decoded by the appropriate device on the other end. \n\nBy not including this decoder in every device, they are far cheaper and more universal. \n\nWhy do we need HDMI? Because it's transmitting an uncompressed and decoded signal from the cable box. You *could* send the signal over coaxial, but you'd need to encode it at the cable box and then decode it within the TV, requiring a tuner in the TV. That DOES exist, but it's uncommon, just because of cost.\n\nWhy do we need Cat5/6? Same thing. Modem is decoding, and encoding, constantly. Some wires in there are for uploading, some downloading, all are there so that the cable can be used universally for data transmission. As you might guess, building a modem into a PC is possible, but expensive and unnecessary.\n\nPhone lines? Well, back in the day, the encoding/decoding was done at the telephone company, but chances are, your modem is doing that now. In order to be compatible with all of the phones ever made, they kept the same wire. You have 4 wires, but only 2 are needed-you're essentially pre-wired for a second phone line. Again, to make a call over coaxial, you'd need a device to encode/decode the signal. Again, while possible, and they do exist, it's too expensive to be practical."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
lbjt8 | please eli5 the difference between baroque, classical, and romantic music. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lbjt8/please_eli5_the_difference_between_baroque/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2rch8n",
"c2rcmbe",
"c2re8mt",
"c2redlf",
"c2resro",
"c2rg0ca",
"c2rch8n",
"c2rcmbe",
"c2re8mt",
"c2redlf",
"c2resro",
"c2rg0ca"
],
"score": [
8,
21,
7,
1084,
3,
5,
8,
21,
7,
1084,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Time periods my friend. Baroque is estimated from 1600-1750, classical was 1750-1800 and romantic was 1800-1900. With this info I'm sure you can go Google the popular artists that were relevant during each said period. Have a great day!",
"dakobladioblada's got it right (and a nuts user name) on time. Basic concepts:\n\nBaroque: Simpler. I say 'simpler' even tho it's not really right. But it stays in the same key or keys, has lots of repetition and is (looking back from this day and age) pretty obvious where it's headed. Baroque music can tend to be sort of like math in that it's a very logical progression. It's all about patterns. You'll hear something repeated, then moved a bit and repeated again, and you'll know where the next 2 or 3 repetitions will move. When it comes to Baroque music, Bach is the Man. Some people put his death as the divider between Baroque and Classical.\n\nClassical. A bit more complex, more variation in key signatures. Music also started branching out in terms of who listened to it. It wasn't just kings or nobles who'd pay for it, but also middle class folks would get together and have someone play pieces for them. There was also a movement in here that started trying to tell specific stories with music. Mozart's a big one here, Schubert, too. Beethoven's Classical era but he wrote the beginning of the Romantic era. (Similarly, Brahms lived the Romantic era but wrote the end of the Classical era . . .)\n\nRomantic. Huge variations in key, instrumentation, all sorts of stuff here. Bigger orchestras than ever before. Loud singers. Lots of craziness. Lots of expressivity. Sounds like a movie soundtrack, and it's actually where a lot of soundtrack composers get a lot of their inspiration. This is also when all the big operas (the stereotypical operas) happened. Puccini (opera guy), Chopin, Verdi (also Opera), Dvorak. The Big 5 in Russia are sorta the tail end of big Romantic stuff and also transitioned into the next period.\n\nEdit: Dvorak!",
"Let me try.\n\nOthers have talked about the time periods already, but you knew that. As for style...\n\nThe most obvious markers of Baroque music are the harmony and polyphony. What do I mean by that? One of the most popular devices of the early Baroque period (and of J. S. Bach, whose music would actually have been considered old-fashioned in his time) is the use of many long, complex melodies at the same time -- polyphony. While this is going on, chords progress according to strict, formulaic rules. One could even say that the harmony guides the melodies. Sequences -- patterns of chords (like I-IV-vii0-iii-vi-ii-V-I -- see how the chords go up a 4th, down a 5th, up a 4th, down a 5th, etc.?) -- are very common, and the melodies often repeat just like the patterns. As for instruments, if you hear a harpsichord, it's probably Baroque music! Bach liked to write for the recorder, too, and some other older instruments, even though they'd already fallen out of style by the time he wrote for them. By the way, there was *plenty* of inventiveness in Baroque music. It all sounds kind of similar now, but if you look more carefully, you can see the genius and experimentation in much of it, Bach especially. Also, Bach's music is so popular that it's not difficult to find brass quintets (using instruments not even available in his time) playing music originally written for the organ, for instance.\n\nClassical music is a return to simplicity. I am not a fan of this period, especially of Mozart, not that there aren't gems here and there. The meandering chord progressions of the Baroque period are replaced by much simpler ones, and the melodies are now much more symmetric and sectioned. What do I mean by this? Twinkle Twinkle Little Star is a Classical melody by Mozart (which has been changed over the years, but still). Look how it follows such a simple pattern -- each line has the same rhythm, and each pair of lines or single line is a scale: 11 55 *_66 5, 44 33 22 1_*, *_55 44 33 2_*, *_55 44 33 2_*, 11 55 *_66 5, 44 33 22 1_*. The whole thing uses mostly just two chords, I and V (with a IV in there too, if you hear it that way). To me, most Classical melodies are not interesting at all, and the harmonies, even worse. Not to mention all the formulaic gestures -- little musical moments that keep popping up in different pieces all the frickin' time. As for instruments, there's a lot of string music. Classical orchestral music tends to be very string-heavy, with woodwinds mostly in auxiliary roles or as solo instruments but not in principal orchestral parts. Life was good for first violinists but boring for second violinists, never mind the winds, and the brass was probably not even there.\n\nRomantic music is all about exploration of the musical realm, but it's still pretty grounded in what came before. There are beautiful melodies and inventive harmonic progressions, including the Schubert third which would have been nearly unthinkable in Baroque or Classical times. The symphony evolved during this period, mostly, so the modern orchestra, equipped specifically to play Romantic symphonies, is similar to the Romantic orchestra, with a few exceptions (real tubas, for instance, new percussion instruments, maybe saxophones in rare occasions). The only thing is that, for the most part, Romantic music sticks to the established rules of harmony even as it opens horizons. Things are still in major or minor keys, even though they might change several times during a piece. Symphonies are gigantic undertakings, unlike the symphonies of the Classical period (Mozart wrote 41 of them; Beethoven wrote 9), and more than following some musical form, they explore a world of emotion. What really describes Romantic music is that here, music becomes much less abstract. When you listen to Berlioz's Symphony Fantastique, a piece of programmatic music -- the listener can look at the program to see what story the composer intends for it to tell -- you can hear the main character, represented by a theme, get his head chopped off, and you can hear the head bouncing because Berlioz was a crazy, crazy man. You can hear the Witches' Sabbath, with the theme played in a bouncy manner on Eb clarinet, strings playing with the wood of their bows instead of the bowstrings, tubas playing Dies Irae. There is meaning and emotional content, not just notes and light background music.\n\nAnyway, I hope that's elucidating!",
"We know almost nothing about music in Europe before the Middle Ages. Virtually nothing survives from the pre-Medieval West, meaning we don't know what kind of songs the Romans sang, or what music Homer's epic poetry was meant to be sung to - doubtless, a very great loss. But our method for recording music on paper - musical notation - was slowly developed over the course of the middle ages to allow Christianity to use certain music for religious purposes. What survives of that time is spectacularly beautiful. It was in the spirit of that age that music would be simple, slow, and an exercise in capturing true beauty and holding it for as long as possible. A good example would be the music of [Hildegard von Bingen](_URL_2_)(1098-1179), an 12th Century nun who is still remembered as perhaps the greatest composer before the Renaissance. \n\nWhen the Renaissance did come, it's effect on music was still nominal. High music, in the service of the Church, was still slow and reverent, but was becoming more complicated. In Medieval music, all the singers generally sang the same part, only occasionally creating harmonies, all strengthening the music together, a reflection of the deep humility of its age, but in the Renaissance, something exciting happened - composers began to create different lines for different singers, not only allowing for harmony, but also for the lines to be played against each other. Music became more interesting, more difficult to perform, and arguably, far more beautiful. Perhaps the greatest composer of this period is [Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina](_URL_0_)(1526-1594), an Italian organist famous for his greatly influential choral music that fully displays the range and power of Renaissance music. \n\nBut it was during the Renaissance that a more or less permanent musical class developed in Europe, allowing for more varied and complicated music. And indeed, composers created something entirely new during the late Renaissance and early modern age. [Claudio Monteverdi](_URL_5_)(1567-1643) is probably the most important composer you've never heard of. That is because he is widely regarded as the first composer of the Baroque age. His music was bold, complicated, even difficult to play; but mostly, it was *contrapunctal*, music by point and counter point, sounding like an argument between the musicians themselves. He even wrote what is now recognized as the [first opera](_URL_10_) in 1607, appropriately based on the story of Orpheus, who conquered the powers of death with the power of his music. A new age had begun, an age that would see simply uncountable works of extraordinary art. With the beginning of the Baroque age, it may well be said, human music had finally come of age.\n\nThe Baroque age was one of artistic flourish and big ideas: the West enjoyed an unequaled explosion in art - particularly in architecture, poetry and music - as well as science and philosophy. In keeping with the spirit of the age, Baroque music quickly took on a sense of mathematical proportion and harmonious design. In particular, [Antonio Vivaldi](_URL_6_)(1678-1741) took a scientific approach to music, creating carefully balanced concerti that also allow musicians to fully exercise their skill. He was vastly influential in his time, but was largely forgotten soon after his death until the early 20th Century. He was a particularly strong influence on [Johann Sebastian Bach](_URL_7_)(1685-1750), a possible candidate for the greatest artist mankind has ever produced. He wrote in every style and for every instrument that his time allowed him, with the result that virtually every musician in the world has played his music. He wrote music for churches all of his life, including the most beautiful of all choral and organ music. Bach's music is flawless, mind-boggling, almost philosophical in the implications of its perfect construction. It has never been equaled. In particular, a Passion Play he wrote in 1727 remains one of the great artistic achievements of mankind, deep in feeling, spiritual and intellectual, heavy in meaning between music and drama, and possessing what I believe to be [the single most beautiful song ever written.](_URL_4_)\n\nMusical tastes were changing even in Bach's time; he knew that the Baroque age would die with him. The West was experiencing another passionate examination of its classical roots, in particular Greek and Roman art. At first this movement was called Neo-Classicism, but in music it is now referred to as the Classical Era. It sought simplicity, clarity in design and thought. It would prove to be somewhat shorter than the Baroque period that came before it, and even though it was graced by many great composers, including the great Cellist Luigi Boccherini and the Austrians Joseph Haydn and Franz Schubert, the age was dominated by the incomparable [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart](_URL_8_)(1756-1791). Among all composers, and perhaps all artists, Mozart is the clearest and brightest, the perfect encapsulation of his flamboyantly brilliant age. He is also the greatest prodigy the world has ever known: he seems to have begun composing from the moment he could write, and even though he died at the age of 35, remains one of the most prolific of all composers. Like Bach, he wrote in all forms available: dozens of symphonies, hundreds of concerti and some of the most famous ([and beautiful](_URL_3_)) operas ever written. What Shakespeare was to literature, Mozart was to music; at once accessible to all, deeply felt and brilliantly captivating, as well as thick with importance, nuance, and a genius that allows a curious observer to continue finding meaning wherever he looks. \n\nIf the Classical age was short, it was only because it was overtaken unexpectedly by a world that ceased to be moved by its quiet, charming ideals. The new 19th century demanded feeling, passion, movement; this was an age of countless revolutions, visible not only on the map, but in human knowledge as well, with Darwin and Marx fundamentally changing the way the world saw itself. But artistically, and especially musically, the coming of the Romantic age was driven by an extraordinary man whose troubled life would radically change human art. [Ludwig van Beethoven](_URL_11_)(1770-1827) began writing in a style very similar to Mozart's, but his voice becomes murkier, and digs deep into human passions and will to create soaring odes to mankind. Where Bach was mathematical, Mozart clear, Beethoven bring humanity itself to a fever pitch, becoming the great prophet of our passionate age of individuality and building a strong foundation for our nagging Modern sense of disappointment. In fact, he is the greatest, most vocal libertine in the western tradition; his music is thick with a universal [urge for freedom](_URL_9_) that was particularly potent in his age of powerful monarchs, but that continues to advocate man's striving toward freedom today. His 9 symphonies remain the untouchable heights of the form, and in fact, few composers since have dared to write more than that magical number. The [final movement of his 9th symphony](_URL_1_) has become a symbol of the greatness of Man, of the promise and strength of the human spirit.\n\nThe revolution Beethoven sparked would result in the greatest wealth of truly great music the West has ever enjoyed, influencing a cohort of great composers whose only failure was to be born into an age of greatness: Johannes Brahms, Antonin Dvorak, Peter Ilich Tchaikovsy, Robert Schumann, Sergey Rachmaninoff, Gustav Mahler, a truly unmatched age in the history of music. Romanticism, too, would pass away, as the 20th century began to prefer intellectual expression, dissonance, and nuanced expression of Modern and Post-Modern disaffection. With recorded music, the entertainment that Art Music had provided since the Renaissance began to be overshadowed by other, more popular, forms of music. But while it lasted, Western Art Music was a true artistic achievement, unequaled in any other work of Man.",
"thanks to konisforce, xiipaoc and hellonreddit for the much more in depth explanations. OP, if you are looking for more, i'd be more than happy to scan some articles from an old music appreciation book i have from college.",
"Some of these answers are technically correct, but maybe miss something. I studied music in college and have studied and played these time periods a good deal. \n\nRenaissance: really defined by counterpoint - I.e. Melodies that go on at the same time that compliment each other. Think of if a bass player and a guitar player were playing a different but related melody at the same time. As the Renaissance period went on, this counterpoint grew so dense, that you had 70 or so individual voices going on at the same time. People to check out from this period: Thomas Tallis, Palestrina, John Dowland, among others. \n\nBaroque: around 1600, some people were getting sick of all the counterpoint, so music was created that did away with counterpoint, and now the music was just chords and a melody, much like pop songs today. This is when opera was invented. As the baroque went along, people like Bach looked back at the renaissance and added in counterpoint again. This is what people usually think of when they think of Baroque music, but that's really more complex and much more dense than the early Baroque. Characteristics of baroque also are rapidly changing chords and short phrases. People to check out: Bach, Vivaldi, Purcell...\n\nClassical - the late baroque music was very dense, so people wanted to simplify again. What came from this was static harmony - chords that were held out for long periods of time. This would rarely happen in the baroque era. Phrases also became longer. People like Beethoven and Schubert started messing around with conventional harmony as the classical era came to a close, and were really the bridge between late classical and the early romantic. To get some understanding of the difference between classical and the start of romanticism, check out Beethoven's earlier piano sonatas and his later ones. Schubert, Mozart, Beethoven... \n\nRomantic - Here, conventions in harmony were stretched even further than Beethoven did. New influences were looked for, and music became more descriptive I.e. The tone poem. As this era went on, people like Wagner would stretch harmony to its limits, almost to atonalism (no keys) - but that would be developed more in the 20th century. You can really hear this in his opera Tristan und Isolde. People to check out - Liszt, Robert Schumann, Berlioz, Mahler, Grieg, Tchaikovsky, Richard Strauss...\n\nPretty simplified, but that should hopefully help a little. ",
"Time periods my friend. Baroque is estimated from 1600-1750, classical was 1750-1800 and romantic was 1800-1900. With this info I'm sure you can go Google the popular artists that were relevant during each said period. Have a great day!",
"dakobladioblada's got it right (and a nuts user name) on time. Basic concepts:\n\nBaroque: Simpler. I say 'simpler' even tho it's not really right. But it stays in the same key or keys, has lots of repetition and is (looking back from this day and age) pretty obvious where it's headed. Baroque music can tend to be sort of like math in that it's a very logical progression. It's all about patterns. You'll hear something repeated, then moved a bit and repeated again, and you'll know where the next 2 or 3 repetitions will move. When it comes to Baroque music, Bach is the Man. Some people put his death as the divider between Baroque and Classical.\n\nClassical. A bit more complex, more variation in key signatures. Music also started branching out in terms of who listened to it. It wasn't just kings or nobles who'd pay for it, but also middle class folks would get together and have someone play pieces for them. There was also a movement in here that started trying to tell specific stories with music. Mozart's a big one here, Schubert, too. Beethoven's Classical era but he wrote the beginning of the Romantic era. (Similarly, Brahms lived the Romantic era but wrote the end of the Classical era . . .)\n\nRomantic. Huge variations in key, instrumentation, all sorts of stuff here. Bigger orchestras than ever before. Loud singers. Lots of craziness. Lots of expressivity. Sounds like a movie soundtrack, and it's actually where a lot of soundtrack composers get a lot of their inspiration. This is also when all the big operas (the stereotypical operas) happened. Puccini (opera guy), Chopin, Verdi (also Opera), Dvorak. The Big 5 in Russia are sorta the tail end of big Romantic stuff and also transitioned into the next period.\n\nEdit: Dvorak!",
"Let me try.\n\nOthers have talked about the time periods already, but you knew that. As for style...\n\nThe most obvious markers of Baroque music are the harmony and polyphony. What do I mean by that? One of the most popular devices of the early Baroque period (and of J. S. Bach, whose music would actually have been considered old-fashioned in his time) is the use of many long, complex melodies at the same time -- polyphony. While this is going on, chords progress according to strict, formulaic rules. One could even say that the harmony guides the melodies. Sequences -- patterns of chords (like I-IV-vii0-iii-vi-ii-V-I -- see how the chords go up a 4th, down a 5th, up a 4th, down a 5th, etc.?) -- are very common, and the melodies often repeat just like the patterns. As for instruments, if you hear a harpsichord, it's probably Baroque music! Bach liked to write for the recorder, too, and some other older instruments, even though they'd already fallen out of style by the time he wrote for them. By the way, there was *plenty* of inventiveness in Baroque music. It all sounds kind of similar now, but if you look more carefully, you can see the genius and experimentation in much of it, Bach especially. Also, Bach's music is so popular that it's not difficult to find brass quintets (using instruments not even available in his time) playing music originally written for the organ, for instance.\n\nClassical music is a return to simplicity. I am not a fan of this period, especially of Mozart, not that there aren't gems here and there. The meandering chord progressions of the Baroque period are replaced by much simpler ones, and the melodies are now much more symmetric and sectioned. What do I mean by this? Twinkle Twinkle Little Star is a Classical melody by Mozart (which has been changed over the years, but still). Look how it follows such a simple pattern -- each line has the same rhythm, and each pair of lines or single line is a scale: 11 55 *_66 5, 44 33 22 1_*, *_55 44 33 2_*, *_55 44 33 2_*, 11 55 *_66 5, 44 33 22 1_*. The whole thing uses mostly just two chords, I and V (with a IV in there too, if you hear it that way). To me, most Classical melodies are not interesting at all, and the harmonies, even worse. Not to mention all the formulaic gestures -- little musical moments that keep popping up in different pieces all the frickin' time. As for instruments, there's a lot of string music. Classical orchestral music tends to be very string-heavy, with woodwinds mostly in auxiliary roles or as solo instruments but not in principal orchestral parts. Life was good for first violinists but boring for second violinists, never mind the winds, and the brass was probably not even there.\n\nRomantic music is all about exploration of the musical realm, but it's still pretty grounded in what came before. There are beautiful melodies and inventive harmonic progressions, including the Schubert third which would have been nearly unthinkable in Baroque or Classical times. The symphony evolved during this period, mostly, so the modern orchestra, equipped specifically to play Romantic symphonies, is similar to the Romantic orchestra, with a few exceptions (real tubas, for instance, new percussion instruments, maybe saxophones in rare occasions). The only thing is that, for the most part, Romantic music sticks to the established rules of harmony even as it opens horizons. Things are still in major or minor keys, even though they might change several times during a piece. Symphonies are gigantic undertakings, unlike the symphonies of the Classical period (Mozart wrote 41 of them; Beethoven wrote 9), and more than following some musical form, they explore a world of emotion. What really describes Romantic music is that here, music becomes much less abstract. When you listen to Berlioz's Symphony Fantastique, a piece of programmatic music -- the listener can look at the program to see what story the composer intends for it to tell -- you can hear the main character, represented by a theme, get his head chopped off, and you can hear the head bouncing because Berlioz was a crazy, crazy man. You can hear the Witches' Sabbath, with the theme played in a bouncy manner on Eb clarinet, strings playing with the wood of their bows instead of the bowstrings, tubas playing Dies Irae. There is meaning and emotional content, not just notes and light background music.\n\nAnyway, I hope that's elucidating!",
"We know almost nothing about music in Europe before the Middle Ages. Virtually nothing survives from the pre-Medieval West, meaning we don't know what kind of songs the Romans sang, or what music Homer's epic poetry was meant to be sung to - doubtless, a very great loss. But our method for recording music on paper - musical notation - was slowly developed over the course of the middle ages to allow Christianity to use certain music for religious purposes. What survives of that time is spectacularly beautiful. It was in the spirit of that age that music would be simple, slow, and an exercise in capturing true beauty and holding it for as long as possible. A good example would be the music of [Hildegard von Bingen](_URL_2_)(1098-1179), an 12th Century nun who is still remembered as perhaps the greatest composer before the Renaissance. \n\nWhen the Renaissance did come, it's effect on music was still nominal. High music, in the service of the Church, was still slow and reverent, but was becoming more complicated. In Medieval music, all the singers generally sang the same part, only occasionally creating harmonies, all strengthening the music together, a reflection of the deep humility of its age, but in the Renaissance, something exciting happened - composers began to create different lines for different singers, not only allowing for harmony, but also for the lines to be played against each other. Music became more interesting, more difficult to perform, and arguably, far more beautiful. Perhaps the greatest composer of this period is [Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina](_URL_0_)(1526-1594), an Italian organist famous for his greatly influential choral music that fully displays the range and power of Renaissance music. \n\nBut it was during the Renaissance that a more or less permanent musical class developed in Europe, allowing for more varied and complicated music. And indeed, composers created something entirely new during the late Renaissance and early modern age. [Claudio Monteverdi](_URL_5_)(1567-1643) is probably the most important composer you've never heard of. That is because he is widely regarded as the first composer of the Baroque age. His music was bold, complicated, even difficult to play; but mostly, it was *contrapunctal*, music by point and counter point, sounding like an argument between the musicians themselves. He even wrote what is now recognized as the [first opera](_URL_10_) in 1607, appropriately based on the story of Orpheus, who conquered the powers of death with the power of his music. A new age had begun, an age that would see simply uncountable works of extraordinary art. With the beginning of the Baroque age, it may well be said, human music had finally come of age.\n\nThe Baroque age was one of artistic flourish and big ideas: the West enjoyed an unequaled explosion in art - particularly in architecture, poetry and music - as well as science and philosophy. In keeping with the spirit of the age, Baroque music quickly took on a sense of mathematical proportion and harmonious design. In particular, [Antonio Vivaldi](_URL_6_)(1678-1741) took a scientific approach to music, creating carefully balanced concerti that also allow musicians to fully exercise their skill. He was vastly influential in his time, but was largely forgotten soon after his death until the early 20th Century. He was a particularly strong influence on [Johann Sebastian Bach](_URL_7_)(1685-1750), a possible candidate for the greatest artist mankind has ever produced. He wrote in every style and for every instrument that his time allowed him, with the result that virtually every musician in the world has played his music. He wrote music for churches all of his life, including the most beautiful of all choral and organ music. Bach's music is flawless, mind-boggling, almost philosophical in the implications of its perfect construction. It has never been equaled. In particular, a Passion Play he wrote in 1727 remains one of the great artistic achievements of mankind, deep in feeling, spiritual and intellectual, heavy in meaning between music and drama, and possessing what I believe to be [the single most beautiful song ever written.](_URL_4_)\n\nMusical tastes were changing even in Bach's time; he knew that the Baroque age would die with him. The West was experiencing another passionate examination of its classical roots, in particular Greek and Roman art. At first this movement was called Neo-Classicism, but in music it is now referred to as the Classical Era. It sought simplicity, clarity in design and thought. It would prove to be somewhat shorter than the Baroque period that came before it, and even though it was graced by many great composers, including the great Cellist Luigi Boccherini and the Austrians Joseph Haydn and Franz Schubert, the age was dominated by the incomparable [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart](_URL_8_)(1756-1791). Among all composers, and perhaps all artists, Mozart is the clearest and brightest, the perfect encapsulation of his flamboyantly brilliant age. He is also the greatest prodigy the world has ever known: he seems to have begun composing from the moment he could write, and even though he died at the age of 35, remains one of the most prolific of all composers. Like Bach, he wrote in all forms available: dozens of symphonies, hundreds of concerti and some of the most famous ([and beautiful](_URL_3_)) operas ever written. What Shakespeare was to literature, Mozart was to music; at once accessible to all, deeply felt and brilliantly captivating, as well as thick with importance, nuance, and a genius that allows a curious observer to continue finding meaning wherever he looks. \n\nIf the Classical age was short, it was only because it was overtaken unexpectedly by a world that ceased to be moved by its quiet, charming ideals. The new 19th century demanded feeling, passion, movement; this was an age of countless revolutions, visible not only on the map, but in human knowledge as well, with Darwin and Marx fundamentally changing the way the world saw itself. But artistically, and especially musically, the coming of the Romantic age was driven by an extraordinary man whose troubled life would radically change human art. [Ludwig van Beethoven](_URL_11_)(1770-1827) began writing in a style very similar to Mozart's, but his voice becomes murkier, and digs deep into human passions and will to create soaring odes to mankind. Where Bach was mathematical, Mozart clear, Beethoven bring humanity itself to a fever pitch, becoming the great prophet of our passionate age of individuality and building a strong foundation for our nagging Modern sense of disappointment. In fact, he is the greatest, most vocal libertine in the western tradition; his music is thick with a universal [urge for freedom](_URL_9_) that was particularly potent in his age of powerful monarchs, but that continues to advocate man's striving toward freedom today. His 9 symphonies remain the untouchable heights of the form, and in fact, few composers since have dared to write more than that magical number. The [final movement of his 9th symphony](_URL_1_) has become a symbol of the greatness of Man, of the promise and strength of the human spirit.\n\nThe revolution Beethoven sparked would result in the greatest wealth of truly great music the West has ever enjoyed, influencing a cohort of great composers whose only failure was to be born into an age of greatness: Johannes Brahms, Antonin Dvorak, Peter Ilich Tchaikovsy, Robert Schumann, Sergey Rachmaninoff, Gustav Mahler, a truly unmatched age in the history of music. Romanticism, too, would pass away, as the 20th century began to prefer intellectual expression, dissonance, and nuanced expression of Modern and Post-Modern disaffection. With recorded music, the entertainment that Art Music had provided since the Renaissance began to be overshadowed by other, more popular, forms of music. But while it lasted, Western Art Music was a true artistic achievement, unequaled in any other work of Man.",
"thanks to konisforce, xiipaoc and hellonreddit for the much more in depth explanations. OP, if you are looking for more, i'd be more than happy to scan some articles from an old music appreciation book i have from college.",
"Some of these answers are technically correct, but maybe miss something. I studied music in college and have studied and played these time periods a good deal. \n\nRenaissance: really defined by counterpoint - I.e. Melodies that go on at the same time that compliment each other. Think of if a bass player and a guitar player were playing a different but related melody at the same time. As the Renaissance period went on, this counterpoint grew so dense, that you had 70 or so individual voices going on at the same time. People to check out from this period: Thomas Tallis, Palestrina, John Dowland, among others. \n\nBaroque: around 1600, some people were getting sick of all the counterpoint, so music was created that did away with counterpoint, and now the music was just chords and a melody, much like pop songs today. This is when opera was invented. As the baroque went along, people like Bach looked back at the renaissance and added in counterpoint again. This is what people usually think of when they think of Baroque music, but that's really more complex and much more dense than the early Baroque. Characteristics of baroque also are rapidly changing chords and short phrases. People to check out: Bach, Vivaldi, Purcell...\n\nClassical - the late baroque music was very dense, so people wanted to simplify again. What came from this was static harmony - chords that were held out for long periods of time. This would rarely happen in the baroque era. Phrases also became longer. People like Beethoven and Schubert started messing around with conventional harmony as the classical era came to a close, and were really the bridge between late classical and the early romantic. To get some understanding of the difference between classical and the start of romanticism, check out Beethoven's earlier piano sonatas and his later ones. Schubert, Mozart, Beethoven... \n\nRomantic - Here, conventions in harmony were stretched even further than Beethoven did. New influences were looked for, and music became more descriptive I.e. The tone poem. As this era went on, people like Wagner would stretch harmony to its limits, almost to atonalism (no keys) - but that would be developed more in the 20th century. You can really hear this in his opera Tristan und Isolde. People to check out - Liszt, Robert Schumann, Berlioz, Mahler, Grieg, Tchaikovsky, Richard Strauss...\n\nPretty simplified, but that should hopefully help a little. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAS-CdbTdsU&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL31368606D48CC389",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd1Nuu34-3o&feature=related",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eFPJa95qQE&feature=fvst",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLtqZewjwgA",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPAiH9XhTHc",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ay79V_tMGzI",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av7peBiJRRc",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONq9-1OAdz8&feature=related",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2743mtUpt0U&feature=related",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MF3IKyfgcg",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty-TxQyWcF0&feature=related",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uOxOgm5jQ4"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAS-CdbTdsU&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL31368606D48CC389",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd1Nuu34-3o&feature=related",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eFPJa95qQE&feature=fvst",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLtqZewjwgA",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPAiH9XhTHc",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ay79V_tMGzI",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av7peBiJRRc",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONq9-1OAdz8&feature=related",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2743mtUpt0U&feature=related",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MF3IKyfgcg",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty-TxQyWcF0&feature=related",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uOxOgm5jQ4"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
z6lpg | how did evolution start? | The quesiton may sound very nutty and Creationist (I'm an athiest so bleh)
But, how did evolution actually start? I understand how it works and how it keeps working... but how does an organism develop into another one? Is it in the chromosones or was it just an incredible act of randomness? Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/z6lpg/eli5_how_did_evolution_start/ | {
"a_id": [
"c61wlj6",
"c61xj8n",
"c620aep"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Every species is influenced by 2 factors:\n\n1. Genetics (which are inherited from their \"parents\") \n2. Environment. \n\nEvolution happens when both of these factors change. Sometimes the genetic material that is sent by the \"parent\" is slightly different than what is \"received\" by the \"child\".\n\nOn an individual level, the environment may cause one to react slightly differently to the same situation. If this difference helps the individual to survive \"better\", further generations of that individual also have the \"better\" genetic code.\n\nRepeat this process over hundreds of generations, and you have evolution.",
"It's not that evolution starts or stops - it's a feature of nature like gravity and fire. Evolution requires two things: variability and selection. Variability means that there are difference between organisms. Selection means that those differences somehow affect whether an organism has offspring.\nThere are several ways that new species arise. It's actually a pretty complex question. The short answer is that if enough of those small changes accumulate in a group of organisms, they will stop interbreeding with the others in the original group and be, effectively, a new species. If I have an hour free later today I'll try to give a better answer. :) In the mean time, you could go to _URL_0_ and look for lessons tagged with \"Speciation\" (the process by which new species arise).",
"I'd like to point out, that individual organisms DO NOT develop into new organisms. That was Lamark's theory of how populations changed. I.E, giraffe's with long necks get more food from the tops of trees, so they stretch their necks. Now giraffe 1 has a longer neck, and this is passed down to it's offspring. If this were true, when you get a scar or a tattoo that would be passed down to your children. What actually happens is those giraffes in the population with necks that are already long have more babies, thus the next generation will have, on average, longer necks. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"knowmia.com"
],
[]
] |
|
1x7rw3 | what would happen if a juniour mint was left inside a body (abdominal cavity) as in the seinfeld episode? | I searched online but there did't seem to be any good answers... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1x7rw3/eli5_what_would_happen_if_a_juniour_mint_was_left/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf8w4si",
"cf8w9kz"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I hope this gets answered. ",
"The body is extremely sterile inside (minus the gastro-intestinal system). A piece of candy in the abdominal cavity would be very likely to carry in bacteria, which then feed on the candy and body. Depending on what germs were on the junior mint when it was sealed in, you could be looking at [septic shock](_URL_0_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septic_shock"
]
] |
|
978372 | what is exactly the difference between "war" and "warfare" ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/978372/eli5_what_is_exactly_the_difference_between_war/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4652pk",
"e466fj6"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"War is the state of being in conflict, usually between two or more nations. Warfare is the act of engaging in war or the usual activities of war. \n\nIt's the difference between \"jump\" and \"jumping\". One is an action (jump/war), one is the performance of that action (jumping/warfare). ",
"Think about it like this. \n\n\nA bully gives you an ultimatum. \"Give me your chocolate milk or were fighting after school.\" \n\n\nYou decide to keep your chocolate milk. The bully declares, \"Were fighting after school!\" \n\n\nWell that's uncomfortable isn't it? You keep your distance from the bully the rest of the day. You may not want to be around him. You avoid talking to him and his friends. You fear that if he sees you in the hallway, he might punch you. \n\n\n*You can say, you two are in a state of war.*\n\n\nNow a teacher may get wind of this and mediate this before the end of school. Or maybe the end of school comes and he's nowhere to be found. Maybe you're walking home looking around, afraid he might sneak up on you. \n\n\nOr maybe you ask around looking for him, looking to fight it out and get it over with. \n\n\nOnce you actually get into a circle and throw punches, you are *actually* conducting warfare. The actions of war. \n\n\n\nSo pitched battles, gun fights, bombing raids. That is warfare. The actions that go into *winning a war*. \n\n\nWhereas, the **war** is really a state of being. It's a tension between 2 states in which both parties know physical altercations could take place if they come into contact with each other. \n\n\nThat's no fun. You want to be able to be around the other state without fear of having to fight or hurt each other. Well, you 2 can negotiate a resolution. Some agreement that says *I promise I wont hit or hurt you, like normal, as long as you promise to do xyz*. \n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1omwjg | what does criticality have to do with a nuclear bomb? | I came across it in one of our lunch lectures at school, but the lecturer was not able to explain it well. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1omwjg/eli5what_does_criticality_have_to_do_with_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccti4n7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When uranium is split it gives off 3? neutrons. If the density of the uranium is below that of criticality then most of the neutrons won't collide with another uranium atom. However, if the density is high enough for crticality then enough of the neutrons hit other uranium atoms causing them to split and give off their own neutrons and the energy that held the Uranium together as one atom instead of the new 2 atoms. In uranium which has reached criticality this results in a sudden nuclear chain reaction that gives off so much energy that it blows up. Due to this explosion the chain reaction only lasts long enough to split only a tiny fraction of the uranium before the core is destroyed. In this way all nuclear bombs are dirty bombs.\n\nThis occurs in Uranium 235. When U235 absorbs a neutron it becomes unstable and splits. If Uranium 238 absorbs a neutron nothing happens.\n\nPlutonium 239 is also a common material used in nuclear bombs, but most people are probably more familiar with Uranium. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
qpolu | - what happened in canada with the constitution and charter of rights and freedoms in 1982? what were quebec's problems with this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/qpolu/eli5_what_happened_in_canada_with_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3zkoa0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"1982 is generally regarded as when Canada removed its British diaper and became a \"real\" sovereign nation\n\n < humor > \nNobody really know's why Quebec has a problem with following federal rules and guidelines, most of the Federal rules and regulations either have specific subsections, like tax law, or have completely separate, Quebec-only laws. \n\nThe best Canadian Scientists are generally regarded in two major houses when regarding the question of why. One group insists that it is the french people just wanting to be different, and the other insisting that they want to cause problems. a small but growing section argue that they merely don't understand they are not in France any more.\n < /humor > \n\nIn all seriousness, what do you mean? Quebec doesn't have a problem with the Charter."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
28gqi4 | how valid is the idea of homosexuality as an evolutionary population control system? | First of all, I'm not asking for an explaination of the theory, I already know a general outline of it. However, I've started to doubt its validity. I had my high schools finals today, I had to write an essay about overpopulation. I've talked about a lot of things, including this "possibility, which is not sure and should not be taken as fact" (the way I've described it to cover my butt) of homosexuality as a way for evolution to control our overpopulation. Now, I've stated several times that this is still a study, has no real scientific value (or does it? That's what I'm asking) and that it should be considered as nothing but an interesting hypothesis to read. When I've talked about my doubt with a classmate he told me something along the lines of "Evolution is not a sentient being, it can't know that there is overpopulation and then act about it. You're describing something paranormal". Then I've asked him why do Eskimos have a small nose, and he answered "because it's cold in Antartica, but this is not evolution, this is genetics". Then I've proposed to him to read a couple of articles and he replied "No, it doesn't matter, this is what I think". Now, I think I'm right, and that his point doesn't hold, however: was it a mistake to talk about this hypothesis on my essay? How valid is this idea? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28gqi4/eli5_how_valid_is_the_idea_of_homosexuality_as_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"ciaqtan",
"ciaqv1y",
"ciatfsi"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"More than likely, homosexuality is due to the sexual fluidity of our ancestors. Some animals have the ability to change gender so fluidity of sexuality needs to be accompanied by fluidity of attraction. ",
"Your friend is right. Evolution is not \"smart\" in that way. Eskimos have small noses because those who didn't were less likely to survive (in this specific case, my guess would be because a large nose creates more heat exchange in a freezing environment) and had fewer children. As a result, genes for large noses died out, leaving a population with primarily small ones. This is how evolution works, it is not some progressive system with a \"goal\".",
"Evolution is not organized or sentient. It just happens. A species that has many members thrives. Population \"control\" is not control, so much as pressures. An area with not enough food will cause pressure on a population to change. For example, Pacific Islanders don't need as much food as Europeans because their ancestors were the ones who survived the privations of crossing the Pacific Ocean without starving to death.\n\nIf an area becomes too crowded, resources are strained and members of a population will compete for those resources. So, in a case where humans are short on food, aggressive males will mug everyone else for their food and other resources. Less aggressive members will starve. \n\nHomosexuality is a variation on a population. It occurs in other species as well. It is not necessarily a form of \"population control\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8jqpqf | how did avatar gross 2.7 billion worldwide and yet not leave any pop culture footprints? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8jqpqf/eli5_how_did_avatar_gross_27_billion_worldwide/ | {
"a_id": [
"dz1pynf",
"dz1q1o9"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because of the way it was filmed. It was (rightfully imo) billed as a must see in theatre movie. Plus James Cameron has made some pretty, pretty popular movies. \n\nThe story and characters were forgettable. So.....we forgot.",
"Avatar was compelling entirely because of its visuals. The fact that no one remembers the story is a meme.\n\nBasically people paid to just go see the spectacle, especially since it still stands as one of the only movies to do 3D exceptionally well.\n\nEdit since this is ELI5: It was so pretty everyone wanted to see it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1kqj3r | why does printing off money cause inflation? | I understand that if the money was going back into the economy, the prices would go up due to the increased amount of money and then you'd be in the same position as before, but what if you were printing off money in order to replace what's being taken out of the country?
So basically, imagine Britain had to give the US a huge one-off payment for whatever reason, and therefore the UK would have a lot less money in the economy etc. and then to counter this, they just printed off more money. Not to put more in the economy, but to try and keep it the same while also paying America. How would this cause inflation? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kqj3r/eli5_why_does_printing_off_money_cause_inflation/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbrl1mz",
"cbrl4sc",
"cbrlib9",
"cbrmotj",
"cbro5dz"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
23,
31,
2
],
"text": [
"You have to draw the line around all British currency, not just British currency within the country. So if the UK gave the US a ton of pounds, then printed more pounds, the US would be pissed as hell because the money it was given is now worth less.\n",
"You *can't* print more without it being in the economy. The fact that the physical bills are in another country doesn't really matter. The people holding those pounds in the US can spend them just the same as someone in the UK.\n\nHaving said that, inflation isn't really caused by the PHYSICAL printing of more currency. Physical currency is a small fraction (8% maybe? I'd have to look it up) of the actual money in the economy. Much more of the money is just digital numbers in a bank account. Inflation is more likely to be caused by the gov't (or in the US, the Federal Reserve) setting a low interest rate for people to borrow money.",
"I'm actually going to take the 5 in ELI5 literally here and create a simpler economic model of marbles on a primary school playground.\n\nOkay so you got your playground, and everyone has gotten in the habit of collecting marbles. Not only are marbles traded against each other, they're also traded for services and goods, so they essentially make for something of a currency. Also every kid buys their marbles from a different brand, and while they accept any kind of marbles to trade for their marbles they only accept their own marbles back for goods and services.\n\nOkay, so now you're a kid on the playground and you have found a way to get an infinite of your shiny yellow marbles called Ys. Like the other kids you spend your marbles on their marbles, and use their marbles to buy goods and services. You, despite being five, know you shouldn't just spend your infinite Ys whenever you need them, because they need to stay in demand.\n > So basically, imagine Britain had to give the US a huge one-off payment for whatever reason, and therefore the UK would have a lot less money in the economy etc. and then to counter this, they just printed off more money. \n\nSuppose you're somewhat of a bully, and the teacher decides that as a punishment you need to give some large amount of Ys to all the people you've bullied. You smile and just take the Ys from your infinite supply. However, a lot of kids now have plenty of your Ys, so they won't want that many of them extra. And now you can't use your Ys to trade for other marbles as easily, their value has been lowered and you're stuck with an enormous heap of worthless Ys. Worse yet, when the other kids buy your goods and services again, the heap becomes bigger, but you still can't spend as much, or the value will drop again. You have to hoard your pile. However if you hadn't replaced your Ys, those Ys would've come back to you anyway, since kids will buy your goods and services. Those Ys would then be of more or less the same value as before when you've completely recovered from your little economic recession.\n\nThe analogy isn't perfect, since currency is no longer tied to a physical item (used to be coins, in my example marbles), but the effect is still very similar.",
"Printing money doesn't create wealth; it just redistributes it.\n\nImagine an economy with an output of 100 pillows with $100 in total currency. Each pillow is worth 1% of the economy, or $1. If I print out $100 I haven't increased the wealth of my economy. Each pillow is still 1% of the economy, which is now $2. All I've done is given myself half of the purchasing power of the economy; I've basically stolen half of everyone's money. Even if I gave everyone their share of the $100 no one is better off. You still only have access to 100 pillows. Just because you're holding \"more\" money doesn't mean that your purchasing power has changed. People become better off when the output of pillows increases, or with the output of a new desirable product like a bed.",
"This is a good thread, I've learned a lot looking through it.\n\nCould somebody ELI5 how inflation happens every year if extra money is rarely printed and put into circulation?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
33t6hj | how do people animate things moving through the air in stop-motion? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33t6hj/eli5_how_do_people_animate_things_moving_through/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqo59yo",
"cqo5a3j"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"My guess would be that they use a green stick to elevate the object and edit it out later. It's also possible that all the character movements are captured on a green 'carpet' (i.e. there is no vertical movement) and the background is added afterwards. Lots of ways to do it.",
"Usually the object is help up with a thin wire, so thin that the camera can't pick it up. If the object is too heavy to lift with string, then they'll take two pictures, one with someone/something holding the object up, and another shot of just the background, this allows the editor to mask out the person/thing holding it up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
a0p0px | why do you feel the sensation of your feet needing to "breathe" once you go to bed? | I feel like this need is a common thing. For example feeling uncomfortable with socks on or with both legs under the blanket. Why is this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a0p0px/eli5_why_do_you_feel_the_sensation_of_your_feet/ | {
"a_id": [
"eajkqeb"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It's all about regulating body temperature. The feet contain many blood vessels, so by sticking your feet out of the blanket, it allows your body to cool down, by allowing that cool air to cool down the vasculature in your feet (and obviously that blood is going to continue circulating through your body)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6264ra | cameras vs eyes | We are able to look at something like a sun rise or sunset, or lighting in general, and still see all the background parts as well. When I use a camera it tends to focus on the light and darken everything else. Why are we able to capture these amazing views with our eyes, but unable to capture these same beautiful moments with a camera? In general, why can't cameras capture scenic pictures as well as our eyes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6264ra/eli5_cameras_vs_eyes/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfk0sp7"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"A large part of this is a thing known as dynamic range.\n\nThe dynamic range of a camera or any imaging device (including your eyes) is basically the difference in amount of light between the brightest white and the darkest black at any given brightness.\n\nThe human eye has a very high dynamic range, around 10-14 [stops](_URL_0_). (one stop halves or doubles the amount of light)\n\nHigh end cameras can match the human eye in dynamic range, giving good performance in pictures where there is bright and dark areas in the same image.\n\nLow end cameras, especially phone cameras, have a more limited dynamic range than the human eye, thus they can only adjust their exposure to see the lighter parts or the darker parts, but not both at the same time.\n\nPhones with a \"high dynamic range\" feature makes the camera take two pictures, one bright and one dark to get detail in both light and dark areas. This fakes having a higher dynamic range than the camera actually has, and typically isn't as good as a camera that can handle the full dynamic range of the scene.\n\nAnother thing that improves the quality of a picture is the experience of the photographer with their camera, an experienced photographer can make the best use of their camera in a given scene."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value"
]
] |
|
8yjpgo | how many "types" of electromagnetic radiation are there? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8yjpgo/eli5_how_many_types_of_electromagnetic_radiation/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2bcf2l",
"e2bci2r",
"e2bcmj3",
"e2bdvrh",
"e2bgahj",
"e2bhr60",
"e2bmvkh"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Thermal radiation is called Infrared in normal parlance iirc.\nOther types on the EM spectrum are Radio waves,visible light,Ultra Violet light and a bunch of others",
"Hot materials usually glow in infrared, and that's what thermal cameras and [touch-free thermometers](_URL_0_) detect. So \"thermal radiation\" is usually a term used for the infrared part of the EM spectrum.\n\nOtherwise, there's ONE type of EM radiation: EM radiation. It just has different \"colors.\"",
"So everything hotter than absolute 0 gives off energy to its surroundings. \n\nOne way things give off energy is by emitting light (electromagnetic radiation). \n\nThings that are very cool give off very long wavelength, low energy light. Things that are very hot give off very short wavelength, high energy light. \n\nFor things that are at temperatures we commonly experience, the light is way lower energy than the small sliver of the EM spectrum our eyes can detect. However, given the right tool, you can detect this low energy light that the things around us emit. This is what [thermal imaging](_URL_0_) is all about.\n\nThis is almost certainly what this person was referring to as \"thermal radiation.\"\n\n",
"\"Thermal radiation\" is a description of how the EM was generated, it is not a fundamental property of the EM itself. The visible light given off by an incandescent light bulb (and, for the most part, by the sun) is thermal radiation. The visible light given off by fluorescent or LED bulbs is not thermal radiation.\n\nFor objects which are hot but not glowing-brightly-in-the-dark hot, most of the thermal radiation they produce will be in the IR (infrared) part of the EM spectrum. If someone mentions \"thermal radiation\" as a region of the EM spectrum, they are probably referring to the IR regions, but are abusing the vocabulary to do so.",
"Really, there's only one type of electromagnetic radiation and it is light. However, light has different wavelengths depending on the energy of the light. This is the electromagnetic spectrum and we just give names to certain regions of it. So low energy light with wavelength on the order of meters is in the radio part of the spectrum. A bit shorter wavelength (think mm-cm) is microwave. Micrometer length light is generally known as infrared radiation. This is the stuff which is usually associated with heat. From a couple hundred nanometers to just under a micrometer is the visible spectrum. Just a bit shorter (10-200 nm) is ultraviolet light and .01-10 nm is X-ray. Anything shorter than that, we just give the broad name of gamma ray.\n\nThermal radiation is a bit different, most importantly because it doesn't have to come from an electromagnetic process and doesn't have to only produce light. For example, black holes emit thermal radiation, but they emit a particles of every sort. When you hear thermal radiation it more just means that something radiates according to a specific energy curve. Anything that has any temperature at all emits thermal radiation, and for reasonable temperatures, it is usually just light (since it is the lowest energy mode of radiation). However, thermal radiation is not just one piece of the electromagnetic spectrum, and it spans a good chunk of it. So while you generally radiate in the infrared part of the spectrum, every now and then there's some chance you'll emit a microwave or some visible light.",
"Ok electromagnetic radiation (or electromagnetic waves) are basically photons carrying energy. The higher the amount of energy the photons have the smaller the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave. So you can have a wavelength of about 100 meters, we name those radio waves and they have relatively low energy. But you can have electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength of 1 pictometers. We would name those gamma rays and those have a really high energy, this is why they can cause huge damage if you are expose to those.\n\nNow there is a lot of ways that those electromagnetic radiation can be produce. One way is called thermal radiation. So I'll try to explain what is exactly thermal radiation. You see what we call temperature actually represent the amount of thermal energy contain in an atom. The more thermal energy this atom have, the more it will wiggle and the more hot it will feel to us. But atom will leak that thermal energy in two main way (it's actually 3 ways, but two of those are pretty similar so let keep it simple).\n\nThe first way is by direct transfer of energy. Equilibrium is stable, so atoms with more energy tend to give that energy to atoms will less energy that are close by, until they reach an equilibrium. That's the main way heat transfer in our everyday life. \n\nThe second way that atoms ''leak'' thermal energy is by thermal radiation. The atom will produce an electromagnetic radiation that will carry a small amount of thermal energy from the atoms to the outside world, but the amount of really tiny. The wavelength of that thermal radiation will depend on the temperature of the atom. The hotter the atom, the more energy it have, the more energetic (aka a smaller wavelength) the thermal radiation will be. \n\nAt the temperature range of a normal human, the atoms will emit in the infrared range. That's why we usually think of infrared as heat vision, but infrared special when it come to it. It's just that it happen to be what is emitted at the temperature human usually interact with the world. But if the atom is hotter, like a oven heating element, you will see that it glow a dark red. That's because the atoms are hotter, so the thermal radiation wavelength is smaller. If the atoms are hotter than that, like a fire, then it will be bright red on the outside where the temperature is lower, then orange and then yellow in the middle where the fire is stronger and the heat is higher. We can even see things glow blue when it's hot enough, like with some plasma torch. Even hotter than that, and it goes into ultraviolet and higher, range that the human eye can't see.\n\nIn summary: Thermal energy is the way that atom ''leak'' thermal energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation.",
"Here’s my first attempt at ELI5:\nThere aren’t any different types of electromagnetic radiation, really. But electromagnetic radiation varies in frequency and wavelength (the spectrum).\nWe have names for grouping certain bands of EM radiation. We subdivide the EM spectrum with various names such as visible light, x-ray, infrared, and ultraviolet as a convenient way to discuss portions of the spectrum.\n\nHere’s an example: Visible light is EM radiation, and colors range from Red to Violet. We have names for a bunch of colors in between, and you can parse it a fine as you want to. But it’s all EM radiation. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.walmart.com/ip/Temperature-Gun-Non-contact-Infrared-IR-Laser-Thermometer-F0/128470019"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermography"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
lkp4q | why are older games incompatible with windows 7? | I tried installing the Sims 2 today on my new laptop and apparently, the game is incompatible with Windows 7. What makes it so, and why can't gaming companies just release a compatibility patch for it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lkp4q/eli5_why_are_older_games_incompatible_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2th0h1",
"c2thl70",
"c2thng2",
"c2ti328",
"c2ti4gx",
"c2tin8b",
"c2th0h1",
"c2thl70",
"c2thng2",
"c2ti328",
"c2ti4gx",
"c2tin8b"
],
"score": [
22,
34,
4,
40,
5,
2,
22,
34,
4,
40,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"There are many reasons that this can happen, but the most likely one is that the game follows an old and discouraged mantra of saving game data or user preferences directly to its installation directory. That is, it might keep your save games and settings in C:/Program Files/Game Title/Saves/ or something.\n\nThis was all good and fun for WinXP and earlier Windows systems, but when Vista/7 rolled around, it became necessary to have administrative privileges to modify the Program Files directory. This was a decision made ostensibly for security reasons. However, most games don't run in \"administrator mode,\" so when an older game tries to write a settings file to its installation directory, it discovers that it doesn't have permission to write there (which was only granted when installing the game; usually the installer asks for administrative privileges), and since the game doesn't know what to do, it doesn't work as expected.\n\nNowadays, most games save configuration and user save data in a more sensible (and multi-user friendly) place, like a \"My Games\" folder inside your personal My Documents folder (which doesn't require admin. privileges to write to).\n\nEdit: For those saying \"this isn't right because Windows silently just redirects writes to the AppData/ folder\"; consider that older games aren't going to know that this is happening, and might still be trying to read any new files back from their installation directory (unsuccessfully). \n\nAs for patches: Nothing's really stopping publishers from making a patch for this particular situation, it's a relatively easy fix. It's just that most games that are affected by this are sufficiently old that the developer has either moved on and stopped supporting the game, or has disappeared into obscurity.\n\nThere are also other circumstances that could cause a game to not work on Win7 (when the game's programmers make certain assumptions about the operating system and how it works, or use quick-and-dirty code hacks that worked at the time but stopped working now because they were never proper in the first place) which aren't as simple to just patch around.",
"Doesn't windows have a compatibility mode?\n\nRight click on the program. \nselect properties. \nSelect Compatibility tab.\nThen roll back from the start until you find one that runs.\n\nLet me know if this works for you.",
"**Intro**\n\nBasically because of 16bit, 32bit and 64bit:\n\nEach number refers to the number of 1's and 0's that are sent in one package - 16 bit means that there can be up to 65,536 possible combinations sent in one package.\n\n32 bit means there can be 4,294,967,296 possible combinations sent in one package.\n\nAnd 64 bit means there can be about 18,446,744,070,000,000,000 different combinations in one package.\n\n---\n\n**Analogy**\n\nNow, imagine a box with lots of red and blue lego blocks.\nYou and your buddies have made a secret language where for example, if you stack 1 red block on top of 2 blue blocks, it might mean \"yes\". There's one more rule with the language - if you want to give your message to someone else, you need to pull out some blocks, write your message, then give it to the other person - you're not allowed to keep pulling out more and more blocks, because otherwise the other person will get bored waiting.\n\nNow, for some reason, you want to write a story, but in this block language.\nYou can only move your arm in and out of the box at a certain speed, because you're not The Flash or Superman, so you want to be able to pull out as many blocks as you can each time.\nBy being able to pull out 64 blocks, instead of 16 blocks, you can write a bigger message to your friend and tell your story faster.\n\n---\n\n**Real Life - Why?**\n\nNow that we know what the difference between each type of bit number means, the analogy ends - in computers, the processor or graphics card or hard drive, etc needs to stay in sync with everything else. If they lose sync, the computer crashes. \n\nSo if you want to run a program that uses 16 bit messages, instead of 32 bit messages, you need to send a signal throughout the computer, telling it to read packets in 16 bit packets. This may sound simple, but it involves certain parts of the computer having to disable themselves because they can't change their timing, or parts having to run slower than usual, etc.\n\nGoing from 32 bit to 16 bit is halving the packet length. Going from 64 bit to 16 bit however is tougher for the computer and so unless you have software that can create a virtual computer, free to go as slow as it wants, you can't run 16 bit programs on a 64 bit computer.",
"Before answering this question, you need to know a concept called API. It stands for Application Programming Interface. Why is it important?\n\nLet's say a program runs on Windows, it does not talk directly to hardware but to the operating system (technically it is the OS kernel but we don't need to worry about that here). The reason for this is quite obvious (the program doesn't need to know how to handle low level details like managing memory, controlling the graphics card, etc. OS will take care of that - > that's why we need an OS) \n\nThe API specifies what kind of sentence/word a program can talk to the OS. For example, there is a command to draw a pixel on the screen, another command to load a picture from disk, etc. When Windows gets a call from a certain program, it takes care of all low level details like calling the driver of the hardware to actually put a piece of data on to screen memory, etc. (driver itself is an API of the real hardware) What happens when a new version of Windows come is that there are modifications in terms of API, both about the command itself (adding commands to support some new interesting capabilities only available in the new OS)and the real implementation details (how the command works behind the scene).\n\nThose guys from Microsoft try very hard to keep the API backward compatible, even when the API does not make sense for the new hardware anymore. That's one of the main reason why Windows dominates the market (imagining all your old softwares just run when you upgrade to the new version of Windows). You can read more on that from [here](_URL_1_). Here is an interesting example from the article:\n > I first heard about this from one of the developers of the hit game SimCity, who told me that there was a critical bug in his application: it used memory right after freeing it, a major no-no that happened to work OK on DOS but would not work under Windows where memory that is freed is likely to be snatched up by another running application right away. The testers on the Windows team were going through various popular applications, testing them to make sure they worked OK, but SimCity kept crashing. They reported this to the Windows developers, who disassembled SimCity, stepped through it in a debugger, found the bug, and added special code that checked if SimCity was running, and if it did, ran the memory allocator in a special mode in which you could still use memory after freeing it.\n\n\nHowever, sometimes life is not that rosy. If the developers of a game somehow use an undocumented API call (which guys from Redmond just put there for debugging) and that particular call is changed in the new version of Windows, the program that relies on that call just goes kaput, because the OS don't understand the call anymore. Another situation is when the game depends on a specific implementation behavior. For example, a developer know that right after a certain call to the API, Windows will redraw the screen and it takes a fraction of second to do that compared to the real API call to do screen redrawing, so he exploits that to make his game faster. Now the new Windows version comes out, the old API does not redraw the screen anymore and thus the old game fails.\n\nIf you are into games, you likely know the term \"[DirectX](_URL_0_)\". DirectX itself is a set of API used to directly access the hardware. Most games on Windows rely on DirectX to operate. Let's say a game in 1996 depends on a DirectX call doSomethingCool(). However in the latest DirectX version installed on Windows 7, DirectX 10, the developers have deprecated that call because it does not make sense for the new hardware. Most likely it will be there for backward compatibility, but because the hardware does not support it anymore, some sort of emulation must be done. This is the source of incompatibility issues in older games.",
"None of these are ELI5. I hate to be that guy, but please post in the correct subreddit next time.",
"The second part of your question is easy to ELY5: Because they're not making money off the Sims 2 anymore, and can't be bothered. They want you to go buy the Sims 3.",
"There are many reasons that this can happen, but the most likely one is that the game follows an old and discouraged mantra of saving game data or user preferences directly to its installation directory. That is, it might keep your save games and settings in C:/Program Files/Game Title/Saves/ or something.\n\nThis was all good and fun for WinXP and earlier Windows systems, but when Vista/7 rolled around, it became necessary to have administrative privileges to modify the Program Files directory. This was a decision made ostensibly for security reasons. However, most games don't run in \"administrator mode,\" so when an older game tries to write a settings file to its installation directory, it discovers that it doesn't have permission to write there (which was only granted when installing the game; usually the installer asks for administrative privileges), and since the game doesn't know what to do, it doesn't work as expected.\n\nNowadays, most games save configuration and user save data in a more sensible (and multi-user friendly) place, like a \"My Games\" folder inside your personal My Documents folder (which doesn't require admin. privileges to write to).\n\nEdit: For those saying \"this isn't right because Windows silently just redirects writes to the AppData/ folder\"; consider that older games aren't going to know that this is happening, and might still be trying to read any new files back from their installation directory (unsuccessfully). \n\nAs for patches: Nothing's really stopping publishers from making a patch for this particular situation, it's a relatively easy fix. It's just that most games that are affected by this are sufficiently old that the developer has either moved on and stopped supporting the game, or has disappeared into obscurity.\n\nThere are also other circumstances that could cause a game to not work on Win7 (when the game's programmers make certain assumptions about the operating system and how it works, or use quick-and-dirty code hacks that worked at the time but stopped working now because they were never proper in the first place) which aren't as simple to just patch around.",
"Doesn't windows have a compatibility mode?\n\nRight click on the program. \nselect properties. \nSelect Compatibility tab.\nThen roll back from the start until you find one that runs.\n\nLet me know if this works for you.",
"**Intro**\n\nBasically because of 16bit, 32bit and 64bit:\n\nEach number refers to the number of 1's and 0's that are sent in one package - 16 bit means that there can be up to 65,536 possible combinations sent in one package.\n\n32 bit means there can be 4,294,967,296 possible combinations sent in one package.\n\nAnd 64 bit means there can be about 18,446,744,070,000,000,000 different combinations in one package.\n\n---\n\n**Analogy**\n\nNow, imagine a box with lots of red and blue lego blocks.\nYou and your buddies have made a secret language where for example, if you stack 1 red block on top of 2 blue blocks, it might mean \"yes\". There's one more rule with the language - if you want to give your message to someone else, you need to pull out some blocks, write your message, then give it to the other person - you're not allowed to keep pulling out more and more blocks, because otherwise the other person will get bored waiting.\n\nNow, for some reason, you want to write a story, but in this block language.\nYou can only move your arm in and out of the box at a certain speed, because you're not The Flash or Superman, so you want to be able to pull out as many blocks as you can each time.\nBy being able to pull out 64 blocks, instead of 16 blocks, you can write a bigger message to your friend and tell your story faster.\n\n---\n\n**Real Life - Why?**\n\nNow that we know what the difference between each type of bit number means, the analogy ends - in computers, the processor or graphics card or hard drive, etc needs to stay in sync with everything else. If they lose sync, the computer crashes. \n\nSo if you want to run a program that uses 16 bit messages, instead of 32 bit messages, you need to send a signal throughout the computer, telling it to read packets in 16 bit packets. This may sound simple, but it involves certain parts of the computer having to disable themselves because they can't change their timing, or parts having to run slower than usual, etc.\n\nGoing from 32 bit to 16 bit is halving the packet length. Going from 64 bit to 16 bit however is tougher for the computer and so unless you have software that can create a virtual computer, free to go as slow as it wants, you can't run 16 bit programs on a 64 bit computer.",
"Before answering this question, you need to know a concept called API. It stands for Application Programming Interface. Why is it important?\n\nLet's say a program runs on Windows, it does not talk directly to hardware but to the operating system (technically it is the OS kernel but we don't need to worry about that here). The reason for this is quite obvious (the program doesn't need to know how to handle low level details like managing memory, controlling the graphics card, etc. OS will take care of that - > that's why we need an OS) \n\nThe API specifies what kind of sentence/word a program can talk to the OS. For example, there is a command to draw a pixel on the screen, another command to load a picture from disk, etc. When Windows gets a call from a certain program, it takes care of all low level details like calling the driver of the hardware to actually put a piece of data on to screen memory, etc. (driver itself is an API of the real hardware) What happens when a new version of Windows come is that there are modifications in terms of API, both about the command itself (adding commands to support some new interesting capabilities only available in the new OS)and the real implementation details (how the command works behind the scene).\n\nThose guys from Microsoft try very hard to keep the API backward compatible, even when the API does not make sense for the new hardware anymore. That's one of the main reason why Windows dominates the market (imagining all your old softwares just run when you upgrade to the new version of Windows). You can read more on that from [here](_URL_1_). Here is an interesting example from the article:\n > I first heard about this from one of the developers of the hit game SimCity, who told me that there was a critical bug in his application: it used memory right after freeing it, a major no-no that happened to work OK on DOS but would not work under Windows where memory that is freed is likely to be snatched up by another running application right away. The testers on the Windows team were going through various popular applications, testing them to make sure they worked OK, but SimCity kept crashing. They reported this to the Windows developers, who disassembled SimCity, stepped through it in a debugger, found the bug, and added special code that checked if SimCity was running, and if it did, ran the memory allocator in a special mode in which you could still use memory after freeing it.\n\n\nHowever, sometimes life is not that rosy. If the developers of a game somehow use an undocumented API call (which guys from Redmond just put there for debugging) and that particular call is changed in the new version of Windows, the program that relies on that call just goes kaput, because the OS don't understand the call anymore. Another situation is when the game depends on a specific implementation behavior. For example, a developer know that right after a certain call to the API, Windows will redraw the screen and it takes a fraction of second to do that compared to the real API call to do screen redrawing, so he exploits that to make his game faster. Now the new Windows version comes out, the old API does not redraw the screen anymore and thus the old game fails.\n\nIf you are into games, you likely know the term \"[DirectX](_URL_0_)\". DirectX itself is a set of API used to directly access the hardware. Most games on Windows rely on DirectX to operate. Let's say a game in 1996 depends on a DirectX call doSomethingCool(). However in the latest DirectX version installed on Windows 7, DirectX 10, the developers have deprecated that call because it does not make sense for the new hardware. Most likely it will be there for backward compatibility, but because the hardware does not support it anymore, some sort of emulation must be done. This is the source of incompatibility issues in older games.",
"None of these are ELI5. I hate to be that guy, but please post in the correct subreddit next time.",
"The second part of your question is easy to ELY5: Because they're not making money off the Sims 2 anymore, and can't be bothered. They want you to go buy the Sims 3."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directx",
"http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directx",
"http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
2lbm60 | who exactly is guy fawkes and what exactly did he do? | I read about it cause the 5th of November is tomorrow and I couldn't understand a thing. Help? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lbm60/eli5_who_exactly_is_guy_fawkes_and_what_exactly/ | {
"a_id": [
"clt97pn",
"clt99km"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Guy Fawkes was an English bloke who fought to spread Catholicism (over Protestants) After fighting in Spain, he hooked up with a group who then hatched a plot to kill King James (they wanted a Catholic on the throne) Fawkes was guarding a bunker full of gunpowder beneath the Parliament buildings. The plan to blow up the House of Lords was thwarted when King James received a letter of warning and Guy Fawkes was discovered and held in the infamous Tower of London. After a few days of torture, Guy Fawkes talked. He and his co-conspirators were sentenced to be drawn and quartered for treason. However, the last one to meet that fate, Guy Fawkes managed to break his own neck as opposed to being hanged and dismembered. \n\nProbably since early 1600's, England has celebrated November 5th as Guy Fawkes Day or 'bonfire night' (the night his plot was uncovered and the King saved) This is the day/night we used to make a huge bonfire and burn a lifesize effigy out of straw. Potatoes were salted, buttered, wrapped in foil and placed around the outskirts of the fire (most delicious thing ever and amongst my fondest childhood memories of living in England) I hope my recollections aren't too far off or oversimplified.",
"Guy Fawkes attempted, and failed, to blow up the English (not yet the British) Parliament as part of a plan to reinstate Catholicism to England, and a new Catholic English Monarchy. \nThe 5th of November sing-song (Remember, Remember the 5th of November, the gunpowder treason and plot. I see no reason why the gunpowder treason should ever be forgot.) is glorifying preventing detonating the charges and therefore preventing the destruction of Parliament. \n\nGuy Fawkes was used as a symbol in [Alan Moore's](_URL_2_) [V for Vendetta](). V for Vendetta was written in the 1980s about a futuristic 1990s Britain recovering from a devastating war, and ruled by an oppressive police state. A revolutionary, remaining anomyous and using a Guy Fawkes mask, attempts to spark a revolution to bring down said police state. \nMoore's futuristic government in V for Vendetta is clearly shown to be evil. Moore's character's use of Guy Fawkes' identity as a proxy for his own while attempting to overthrow it sympathizes with a similar historical struggle. Guy Fawkes masks were adopted throughout the book by citizens showing their support for revolution against a government that is oppressive, and undeserving of support.\n\nGuy Fawkes, because he was the famously executed member of an early 17th century anti-government plot, because a symbol of support for the overthrow of oppression.\n\nIf you see someone wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, it's either Halloween or you've walked into a surreal Orwellian reenactment.\n\n_URL_0_\n_URL_1_ "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fawkes",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Moore"
]
] |
|
6jh7sh | how can someone see practically all you've done on a computer, even after you've deleted it, but recovering a phone doesn't always find everything? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6jh7sh/eli5_how_can_someone_see_practically_all_youve/ | {
"a_id": [
"dje7jfz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"If you delete something, it's only moved to the trashbin at first, where it's still 100% intact. If you delete it from there, you only tell your OS to clear the place. It basically makes the area on the drive available for being written over, but it's still there, as not every single switch is reset. Only once everything has been written over by something else, it is clearly gone.\n\nPhones are Android, with is UNIX. Windows isn't. That maybe be an explanation for the difference in how it works exactly.\n\nAlso, on a PC you usually have 500 to 1000 GB of storage, but on a phone only 8 to 64 GB. First obviously has a lot more space, and doesn't need to write over old data anywhere as fast."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7w9mf0 | why doesn’t the moon slip into the suns orbit if it’s gravity is so much stronger? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7w9mf0/elif_why_doesnt_the_moon_slip_into_the_suns_orbit/ | {
"a_id": [
"dtym278",
"dtym3kd",
"dtzpa8i"
],
"score": [
2,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the Earth being a semi massive chunk is closer to the Moon than the Sun being a super super super mass",
"The Sun's gravity is very large, but the Moon has a lot of velocity relative to the Sun. Enough that it's already sorta orbiting the Sun (in the same orbit as the Earth) and simply going around the Earth as a perturbation of that orbit.\n\nThe Earth is also much closer, and gravity is an inverse-square force, being half as far means 4 times the force.",
"The sun's gravity **isn't** much stronger.\n\nGravity depends on mass and distance. The sun is more massive than the earth, but it is also much further from the moon, making the earth a much greater gravitational influence.\n\nThe breakeven point where the earth and sun's gravity is equally strong is the L1 Lagrange point, about a million miles from the earth, four times more distant than the moon."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4qm4ke | why do people say to "take a cold shower" when someone is horny? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4qm4ke/eli5_why_do_people_say_to_take_a_cold_shower_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4u194w",
"d4u2cwd",
"d4u4cah"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The male genitalia are outside the body because sperm production is best achieved at lower than normal body temperature. This ideal temperature is maintained by the relaxation and expansion of the scrotum when warm to increase cooling, and the constriction of the scrotum when cold to bring them closer to the body. Blood flow into extremities including the genitals is reduced when cold, causing them to shrivel and become visually smaller.\n\nWhen aroused the genitals become engorged with blood and larger. It takes little extrapolation to see how a cold shower could reduce the size of the genitals and how one might think this would curb sexual desire.",
"Cold showers serve mainly as a distraction to get your mind off of what is mainly you aroused. Similar to people trying to think of mundane unarousing topics to calm themselves when showers are not available. \n\nI'm sure there's some physiological response to cold showers as well that might lower arousal but the majority of it would be psychological. ",
"Arousal has a positive feedback loop, especially with men. Having an erection makes you hornier than you were when that caused the erection. This is part of the arousal escalation process that takes men up that road to climax. Taking a cold shower removes the erection, usually, and thus removes the arousal component that came from having one."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
eruodm | i've read that cases of sars-like virus are increasing across asia. reports said that it was transmitted through human to human contact. will someone enlighten me with what's really happening? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eruodm/eli5_ive_read_that_cases_of_sarslike_virus_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"ff5yenb",
"ff5yf77",
"ff5yfe0",
"ff5yyu3"
],
"score": [
14,
5,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"[SARS = severe acute respiratory syndrome](_URL_0_), or in layman terms \"strong sudden flu.\" It's caused by a virus (like the flu), and it causes flu symptoms, but stronger than normal, including noticeable fever. It can lead to pneumonia, which is basically a flu infection in your lungs.\n\nIt's spreads through contact with body fluids, and since people typically don't touch each other in public, this typically means that if someone coughs or sneezes and you inhale the tiny water droplets that they sneeze into the air, you'll get infected.\n\nWearing [a mask](_URL_1_) is effective at stopping the spread of it, because the dry mask absorbs any droplets of moisture and prevents them from entering your body. It also limits how far they get when a person sneezes or coughs.\n\nWashing hands is also effective at preventing it, because the soap gets rid of the germs. People rub their mouths, noses, and eyes a lot more often than they realize, and you don't have skin in these places, you have wet mucous membranes that are a very easy entry point into the blood stream, for bugs.\n\nSo, TLDR, it's a bad flu, it's viral so antibiotics don't work, and you have to go see a doctor for anti-fever medication and / or other flu medication, and \"quarantine\" yourself in bed for a few days.",
"SARS is Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome. In 2002 it infected 8,098 people and killed 774 in 37 countries. There was no vaccine and as a virus, antibiotics were ineffective. It had an incubation period of 4-6 days and could spread to people via respitory droplets of someone infected and could infect surfaces. It looked like the flu at first. This new coronavirus looks similar to SARS.\n\nImagine an airport, how many travellers have \"the flu\" and how many surfaces do they touch, or breathe on? Now how many healthy people are in that space? \n\nLunar New Year approaches, and that means lots of travel in and to China. Let's say 100,000 people visit, and 1 person gets infected, they fly home to New York with a Layover in London. How many people are exposed, and become carriers from that 1 person? Now scale it up to a 500,000 people travelling in and to China, and all their connecting flights. If we catch it early enough we can quarantine people but can you quarantine everyone with a flu before they infect the next person?",
"It probably started in pigs or chickens then made the jump to humans. It’s in the Corona Virus family. Like many viruses it’s transmitted by coughing or even touching something recently touched by a sufferer then transmitted to the mouth. Most people will only suffer symptoms of a bad cold, but compromised individuals with poor immune systems may develop pneumonia or other serious respiratory problems that could result in death. MERS & SARS are in the Corona Virus Family. To sum up, if you’re in good health you likely would only experience symptoms like a bad cold. \nBest way to not get it-wash hands frequently and avoid contact with infected individuals. \n\n_URL_0_",
"I do not exactly what it is. but to stop this spreading wash your hands, yourself, cover wounds and if you want to wear a mask. And of course cover your mouth/nose. I can not say this enough basic hygiene is very important"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syndrome",
"https://www.uline.com/Product/Detail/S-22137/Disposable-Respirators/Uline-Deluxe-Surgical-Mask"
],
[],
[
"https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/index.html"
],
[]
] |
||
61zcu6 | why do we cringe over thoughts and memories? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/61zcu6/eli5_why_do_we_cringe_over_thoughts_and_memories/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfimbda",
"dfimbje",
"dfimerr",
"dfimhnf",
"dfiskwa",
"dfismfk",
"dfixv95",
"dfiz0xg",
"dfjadn2",
"dfjw6iw"
],
"score": [
1019,
52,
12,
8,
10,
11,
24,
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"From an evolutionary view it is beneficial for us to easily remember bad memories. This helps us avoid repeating mistakes we have witnessed and keep us out of dangers way e.g. My friend was eaten by a bear in that cave, I remember this in great detail and avoid that cave in future so I'm less likely to be eaten by a bear.\n\nI think it might be similar for things we find embarrassing. It's dangerous to do things that alienate you from a group since we are social creatures that rely on acceptance and group work to survive. If we remember things we've done before that threatened our social standing then we aren't likely to repeat the behaviour in future and avoid exclusion. That's just speculation though. \n\nEdit: for people asking for more info on this I highly recommend looking up evolutionary psychology.\n\n'Evolutionary theories of emotion view emotions as adaptive traits - they help the organism to adapt to the demand of the environment and thereby survive' (Izard, 1977; Plutchik, 1984).\n\n[Here is some info on evolutionary psych and emotions](_URL_0_) ",
"I'm an undergraduate currently studying emotion and cognition so I think I may be able to enlighten you a tad. So, current theories of emotion center around two things. The Internal environment and the external environment. The internal environment being your subjective understanding of the environment and the environment being the physical reality to which you operate. Emotions are placed onto environmental energies (Things that happen in reality) as there is only one cognitive state, known as arousal. Arousal is an on or off function within our brain and can be triggered with pretty much anything, be it a glancing touch or an oncoming car. The cool thing about this is that emotions are supplanted on top of environmental energies. In a way, we actively decide how we feel about certain things. The movie Inside Out is a fantastic example of this process. \n\n\n\nWhen it comes to memory and emotion, our brain (us) is particularly good between confusing our internal and external environment and can supplant emotion over memory. I hope this helps, I could not give you any sources but that is what I was taught. ",
"Only highly empathic people suffer from cringe when remembering old memories. The scientific explanation for that \"cringe\" feeling, is that our brains are able to connect with another person so well that we actually \"feel\" what they're feeling. An evolutionary reason for why we cringe is that people who could feel others' pain were less likely to make the same mistakes. For example, in olden times if you a tribesmen tried to eat a poisonous mushroom and you could empathise, you wouldnt make the same mistakes. Cringe is a human emotion which allows us to learn without having to experience the consequences ourselves. When you remember, your brain identifies the old you as another human being, and so you feel the cringe yourself. ",
"Your body remembers events viscerally. A great book about this is The Body Keep the Score by Bessel Van der Kolk. Basically, whatever we experienced in that moment is saved in our brains/bodies and if not processed correctly in the moment it stays with us until it is processed correctly. EMDR (eye movement desensitization and reprocessing) is a great tool used to help reprocess some of these old feelings/memories. It helps take the \"ick\" out of memories.",
"When we recall a memory your brain is essentially reliving that experience to the extent that it is capable. In most cases it's a crude approximation but some memories leave a more distinct imprint. \n\nThis is why sufferers of PTSD have such an extreme reaction when triggered or forced to recall that memory. They are essentially reliving the experience all over again.\n\nMoments that make us feel very awkward or embarrassed are mildly traumatic in the sense that they leave clearer more distinct impression in our minds. \n\nSo when you recall those experiences all of those same emotions are being relived. Thus making you cringe.",
"your brain is a problem solving device\n\nif you don't give it a specific problem to deal with (eg: how do i cross this river, how do i build this ikea bookcase) it doesn't just switch off automatically and wait for a convenient time to switch back on.\n\ninstead it starts looking at your past and future, looking for potential problems it can try and \"solve\"",
"Is it just me or does anyone else let out a strange verbal/phonic tic when this happens?",
"Because we get hung up on what we could have or should have done - forgetting that free will is an illusion. Rather than dwelling on our mistakes, it's much more productive to puzzle out what led to those mistakes being made - armed with new knowledge we can reassure ourselves that we won't make the same mistake again. But at that time, in the past, who we were, what we knew then, we never could have done anything other than that which we did - otherwise we wouldn't be who we are.\n\nTL;DR: stop wasting time obsessing over the unchangeable past, start wasting time obsessing over the unknowable future.",
"Mostly because, I think, we go over the thing we did 10, 5, 1 year ago, even 6 months, even 1 week ago, and think... \"Man, I *really* should have known better. Now I'm embarrassed and humiliated and it's my own fault.\"\n\nSomebody said widom comes from experience... but no matter how wise I get, there are some experiences I wish I'd never had.",
"I see this asked a lot and a lot of people say that it may be intrusive thoughts from a trauma or ptsd, which in some cases it is. However, the vast majority do not meet the diagnostic criteria for PTSD: witness or threat of death or rape.. Basically fucked up shit. I digress.\n\nDespite what anyone says, psychology is basically one persons word against another's.. So technically nobody is right and everybody is right also, the people who get the most attention are those who a believed to be more right. So no one can know for sure if anything is correct in this convoluted subject... I'm still digressing \n\nOkay point at hand, that cringe you feel late at night or when u are alone with your thoughts, has been theorised by Clark & Wells in 1995, as a process of social anxiety disorder. What happens is the event that was embarrassing caused a great deal of inward focus and self monitoring . This great deal of inward focus strongly encodes the situation in memory. That embarrassing memory may be randomly brought into your conscious mind and you may feel an anxious reaction such as a cringe, because it is so heavily encoded in your memory, you will be more likely to randomly retrieve that memory and retrieve it more often, causing what is known as 'rumination'. RUMINATION is the the process of thinking over a prior embarrassment or embarrassments. This according to Clark and Wells is why you cringe at old obsolete things ...... Also can I finally say that of course not all cringes are social anxiety disorder, to an extent remembering an embarrassing thing is perfectly normal... It becomes abnormal when you are plagued by it... (You ruminate, it makes you feel like shit mentally) \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.cep.ucsb.edu/emotion.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5njain | why is it the employee's fault when employers over-pay/accidentally pay you a lot of money? | i just read [this](_URL_1_) article from [/r/nottheonion](_URL_0_) and i have seen many articles like this before.
Why is it when the Employer or Bank f*ck up and the Employee spends some of the money, they('Employee') are/is prosecuted?
I think that if it is the Employer/Banks fault, they should be the ones to suffer the repercussions. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5njain/eli5_why_is_it_the_employees_fault_when_employers/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcbveo8",
"dcbvf70",
"dcbvn0t",
"dcbxnl2"
],
"score": [
12,
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The money isn't yours just because someone else made a mistake. Simply depositing it into your account doesn't mean \"finders keepers\".\n\nIf this kind of mistake happens and you incorrectly have a bunch of money that isn't yours, the correct and legal thing to do is to return that money.\n\nImagine you have a housemate named Jared and you found a bag of money labelled \"Jared's cash\" under your bed. That money isn't suddenly yours. If you spend that money you are stealing Jared's money and it is a crime.\n\nWhy would you think electronic transfers are any different?",
"Because it isn't their money. It's not the employee's fault when an employer or bank accidentally overpays them or gives them money that isn't theirs. It's the employee's fault for spending money that isn't theirs.\n\nIf they didn't spend it, and gave it back, there wouldn't be an issue. Generally speaking, you're not allowed to spend or use things that aren't yours and a clerical error or human mistake doesn't magically make that money yours.",
"It isn't the employee's fault a mistake was made. It is the employee's fault they took advantage of the mistake. The employer has every right to fix the mistake and get the extra money back. \n\nIf I buy a stick of gum and hand the grocery store clerk $20, is it okay for the clerk to just keep it all? ",
"Well in regards to Banks screwing up...that money belongs to someone else and it was deposited into your account by accident. Just because that happens doesn't mean you're entitled to it. In regards to employers screwing up, well that's also your fault because you know how much you're usually paid and unless the amount you received is a matter of 1-5 dollars then you know you shouldn't have been paid that. Just because someone else screwed up doesn't mean you're entitled to keeping the money."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/",
"http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/jail-for-flabbergasted-teen-who-succumbed-to-temptation-after-20k-was-mistakenly-lodged-in-his-account-35360122.html"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2dj72q | why do all(most) soft drink cans all contain the same volume of 330ml. also how have the cans become uniform in size and shape throughout different brands and country? | Its bugged me for years. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dj72q/eli5why_do_allmost_soft_drink_cans_all_contain/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjpz7wx",
"cjpzozx",
"cjq17r7",
"cjq1dco",
"cjq1f5m",
"cjq3yph",
"cjq8a3l",
"cjq8d6i",
"cjqbt2h",
"cjqfwxy"
],
"score": [
13,
38,
3,
19,
5,
4,
3,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"From what I can read- The americans has 12oz (which is 355ml) and when making for british/european markets that rounded to 1/3 of a litre. (I understand this is 333.33 but that is a silly can size)\n\nThis is the best answer I can find. This was from the editor of canmaker magazine. [So much excitement ](_URL_0_)",
"There is a good break down [here](_URL_0_).\n\n\nThat explains the dimensions. There is basically a lot of engineering that goes into the can's design. They found the optimum for the hand size and acceptable length, while maximizing the amount drink it can hold. They arrived at the current design. Also, manufacturability of the can made them choose a cylinder in the first place.",
"I would say packaging has a great deal to do with it. I didn't read any of the other comments because my boss will walk through the door at any minu",
"In North America, the standard can size is 12 fluid ounces (355 ml). In India and most of Europe, standard cans are 330 ml, which is approximately 1/3 of a liter. In some Continental European countries there is a second standard can size, which is 500ml. These larger cans are very often used for beer. In Australia, the standard can size is 375 ml and in South Africa standard cans are 340 ml",
"330ml is quite uncommon here in Australia, near all cans come in 375ml",
"I live in Slovakia and the 330ml can is a rarity. Bottles are far more popular here, and cans, when used, are usually 250ml or 500ml. The latter being popular for beer and the former for energy drinks. This is a shame because in Canada I got used to drinking from cans. I much prefer them since a 2L bottle loses its fizziness very quickly, especially if you have to store it horizontally, which you do have to since the fridges are much smaller than the ones in Canada. I can't wait to get back to civilization. ",
"I had a 1 liter beer can once. It was glorious!",
"[r/turbonegro81063](_URL_0_) makes a valid point with packaging.\n\nWhile the footprint of the case of cans remains largely the same between 355mL, 375mL and 333mL, it's so that the can be placed on a pallet with the exact same ten-pattern, regardless of individual can-height.\n\nSo if a store orders, say, 15 types of beer for their store. Chances are they'll get their big seller and order 10 or 20 of those, then the remaining types of beer are stacked in order by their height relative to other cans; ensuring that by the time all the cans have been stacked, you have a relatively flat surface.\n\nThis means that boxes of wine, whiskey, vodka, gin, et-al can be stacked on top of the cans (on top of a pallet), and the whole structure will be stable when it's tied down.\n\nSource: Order picked for a central distribution warehouse for alcohol.",
"My guess would be vending machines need a unform size to have it work effectively.",
"I remember when cans were 280ml instead of 355ml, then ... all of a sudden they were 355ml.\n\nI think the change came at the end of the 80s. I'm in Canada by the way!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.canmaker.com/news/"
],
[
"http://datagenetics.com/blog/august12014/index.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/user/turbonegro81063"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
1jzx34 | why does steroid cream help treat poison ivy? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1jzx34/eli5_why_does_steroid_cream_help_treat_poison_ivy/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbjxnys"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Certain steroids, particularly those used in creams, can be used to treat to allergic reactions as they suppress certain pathways in the body's immune response system. The itchiness and inflammation caused by poison ivy is an allergic response, hence steroid creams are an effective treatment."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4fishk | if high worker wages are detrimental to an economy, why was the pre-civil war north of the usa more prosperous than the south which practiced slavery? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fishk/eli5_if_high_worker_wages_are_detrimental_to_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"d294zgi"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Who says high wages are detrimental to an economy?\n\nEdit: to go ahead and actually answer your question, high wages are not detrimental to an economy. The US economy is driven mostly by consumer demand for goods and services. If workers were paid less (or not at all) there would be far, far less economic activity as no one would be able to purchase any of the goods or services that companies would be able to oh so cheaply produce with all this cheap/free labor.\n\nI'm assuming you're asking this with a particular policy (e.g. the minimum wage) in mind. If that's the case, you should ask about that policy more directly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7dnniy | why did i never get sleepy during the day until high school, and now as an adult i'm constantly in need of a nap daily? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7dnniy/eli5_why_did_i_never_get_sleepy_during_the_day/ | {
"a_id": [
"dpz3iz3"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"As we get older our sleep patterns naturally change, and the amount of sleep we need decreases steadily until adulthood. Why we dream is another conversation entirely, but the agreed upon part is that it's to recover and help with memorization. When you're young you're constantly learning different things and incrediably active, so you need more sleep. Once you're old you aren't learning new things every day, like how to walk or do maths, and things are more static, thus less sleep.\n\nWhere this also changes things though is how this is all broken up in sleep cycles. Children sleep in very short waves, thus lots of naps, then adolescence occurs and our clock shifts to later times before going to bed. Around 25 or so, our clocks shift to sleeping earlier and waking earlier. Late adulthood people will sleep the same as adults, but go to sleep earlier still.\n\nThe other part is your routine. Sleep cycles go off the last 2 weeks, but influenced by the last 3 days. Working 9-5 everyday you're waking up at 7, so going ~9 hours back you'll be going to sleep around 10, and feeling drowsy around 8/9. If you were to suddenly go to night shift, you'd have a rough time since even if you slept the whole day the next day, you'd still get drowsy as normal around 8/9. After 3 days you'd be somewhat on the next schedule, but could easily default back to the 9-5 schedule. After 2 weeks though, you'll be set on the new schedule and going back to 9-5 would be difficult."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1x2u85 | what basically happened at the bill nye and ken ham debate? | Who won and what are some great "moments"? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1x2u85/eli5_what_basically_happened_at_the_bill_nye_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf7ljtn",
"cf7lkpi",
"cf7lphe",
"cf7ulv8"
],
"score": [
9,
11,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Nobody really \"won\" as it wasn't really that kind of debate. It was more like two opposing viewpoints taking turns expressing their views, without either side really arguing or refuting claims or attacking points in replies. ",
"Nobody won, Bill Nye cited science the whole time and Ham's source was the Bible the entire time.",
"that all depends on your personal take on evolution and creation. Bill tore down Ken Hams creation model because the model is not capable of predicting anything. Ken Ham never really responded to this. Ham claimed that evolution is based on information that we can collect today but just because that is what is happening now doesn't mean that is how it happened in the past. Ham split science into observational science (science that you can see currently) and historical science (assumptions about the past). ",
"Ken Ham: Bible says the earth is 6000 years old, and you weren't on earth 6,000 years ago or 6 million years ago to prove different. Sure, you can extrapolate based on geology working the way it does now, but maybe radioactivity and tectonic movements behaved differently 2000 years ago?\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
188txj | why do most of remote-controlled helicopters have 2 rotors for more stability, while real ones often only have one? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/188txj/eli5_why_do_most_of_remotecontrolled_helicopters/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8cmu2m",
"c8crv31"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"Real helicopters have a tail-rotor for stability.\n\nIt takes skill to fly a real helicopter. Every little change that you make will affect the amount of work the tail-rotor has to do. Helicopter pilots are constantly making tiny little changes to the tail-rotor using their feet on the pedals.\n\nHaving two main rotors is much simpler. Whatever you do to one rotor, you do pretty much exactly the same to the other rotor, and they always balance each other out.\n\nBut although it's easier to control, it's more complex to build a helicopter with two main rotors. And, most I importantly, complexity means added weight, and real helicopters, for the most part, can't afford to carry the extra weight around with them. The entire helicopter, including the engine, rotors, cabin and structure, is usually designed to be as light as possible. Which is why very few helicopters are designed like this.\n\nThose that do (the Chinook, for example) are designed to carry very heavy loads, too heavy to easily be lifted by just one rotor. The whole design is very different to other helicopters, to enable them to carry heavy loads.",
"Fun fact. After 85 knots most helicopters do not need a tail rotor. As long as they don't slow down. The forward momentum counteracts the torque from the main rotor. (Apache helicopter Crewchief)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
22wsun | why doctors have to pull the plunger of an injection needle up a little before pushing all the way down when applying a vaccine injection? | I'm really curious about this cause I watch a lot of tv shows about doctors and everytime they give an injection, they plunge the needle under the skin, then pull the plunger up a little, mixing little bit of blood from the patient with the liquid medicine in the process, then they push the plunger all the way after to finish the injection. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22wsun/eli5_why_doctors_have_to_pull_the_plunger_of_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgr5m0c"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The doctor or nurse is trying to inject the vaccine into muscle. When they pull back on the plunger they are trying to feel the resistance of a vacuum, as the muscle doesn't really yield very much to suck out. If they had unintentionally hit an artery or vein they would suck out a bunch of blood as they withdrew the plunger, and they would know not to inject there."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2yrdfb | why does china have such a serious problem with baby trafficking? | I just read a story about a baby boy being kidnapped. It happens in the United States where I live as well but the problem in China appears to be so much larger. Can somebody explain why? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2yrdfb/eli5_why_does_china_have_such_a_serious_problem/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpc8s2z",
"cpca44w"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"There are limitations on family size because of the overpopulation. With China's patriarchal system, everyone wants a boy. If a girl is born first, you never know what might happen to them. ",
"Lots of families are either infertile due to massive health problems in china, or are constrained by the one child policy."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3zykyi | how do singers from bands like shinedown not ruin their voices, while singers from other bands like metallica go on to lose theirs. what makes the difference? | I've been enjoying these types of songs and would love to learn how to sing them, but I don't want to damage my voice. How do some singers manage to keep their voice relatively intact for decades while others don't last more than a few years, and how would I go about learning how to sing like this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zykyi/eli5_how_do_singers_from_bands_like_shinedown_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyqaa1n",
"cyqcah2",
"cyqidyx",
"cyqk3cq"
],
"score": [
5,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It depends on the person and technique \n\nWith the right signing technique and training, many singers can sing harsh (Tom Araya) or extremely harsh (extreme metal) for decades\n\nIn the case of James Hetfield, he had no prior singing experience and his Justice era singing was very risky from a singers point of view, IIRC; it's a miracle he didnt blow out his voice before the Black Album\n\nI'd suggest taking lessons or reading up on technique to prevent doing something that comes naturally but will also ruin your voice quicker (the way James did)",
"You're comparing the vocals from a band that formed in 2001 and hasn't performed nearly as much to one that was formed in 1981 for starters. But everyone's voice goes eventually. The lifespan depends on how well you take care of yourself and simple genetics. It's the same way metal drummers typically have shorter careers than other drummers. Shit is hard work. ",
"James Hetfield and Jon Bon Jovi are good examples of singers who have adjusted and 'cleaned up' their technique to allow them to keep singing their songs. \nBrian Johnson from AC/DC is an excellent example of one who has a solid technique behind his rasp but is getting tired as a 68 year old hard rock singer so struggles with those higher notes. \nMeat Loaf is an example of a terrible, terrible technique who lost his mojo years and years before he should've.",
"If you have proper technique and training, there is no reason you should ever lose your voice. \n\nBut because most rock singers don't have any technical vocal training, it comes down to differences in vocal style, and also sometimes lifestyle. If you spend a lot of time pushing the limits of your comfortable range, if you smoke or drink a lot, if you have certain conditions such as acid reflux, these can all increase wear on your voice.\n\nAny styles involving a lot of screaming or hoarse sounds are particularly bad for your voice. Essentially, what happens when you sing or speak is that your vocal folds (or vocal cords) open and close and flap together. Good Singing technique will minimize the amount of force that your vocal folds will hit each other with. If you don't minimize the trauma to them, they can develop what are essentially calluses on the vocal fold, or nodes, which can prevent them from closing all the way. This is just one of the types of damage that can occur. \n\nSteven Tyler is a good example of this- he has a pretty strenuous style, and the only reason he has been able to continue performing so long is because he has had to alter his style and he has had multiple surgeries.\n\nHere is an interesting clip from a film called The Incredible Human Machine that elaborates on the topic and gives a really good explanation on how the vocal folds operate:\n\n_URL_0_\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MDn5GgyxyU"
]
] |
|
7w0rh5 | i was born in the uk in the early 90s, why aren't i allowed to donate blood? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7w0rh5/eli5_i_was_born_in_the_uk_in_the_early_90s_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"dtwm5y8",
"dtwm83x",
"dtwnx9j"
],
"score": [
12,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They’re worried that you might be carrying Mad Cow disease. The UK had an outbreak during the period you were born and because the disease can have little to no side effects for years it’s still a slight risk. \n\nEdit: Also, generally speaking blood banks are very conservative about the blood they except. If they have even a slight suspicion that you might have a particular disease, then they’ll reject your blood. ",
"because mad cow disease had a pretty big spread in UK. mad cow can be transmitted via blood transfusion. so obviously it's a big deal to not spread it. ",
"Mad Cow Disease. \n\nMad Cow is a prion disease that broke out in the UK due to the practice of ranchers using cow brains and scrap meat to supplement protein content of the feed they were giving their cattle. This prion disease had similar symptoms to the human prion diseases of Creutzfeld-Jakobs Disease or Kuru and they are deadly. Specifically there were signs of Mad Cow starting to jump the species barrier and there was a major panic in the world based on that. British people are still prohibited from donating blood in many countries because prion diseases can lay dormant for multiple decades before having symptoms, and you cannot really search for them without disecting the brain. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3c39qt | isis seems to be growing every passing day, but it seems like no nation is obviously taking them seriously, why is that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3c39qt/eli5isis_seems_to_be_growing_every_passing_day/ | {
"a_id": [
"csruebq",
"csruonn",
"csrursn",
"csrut4l",
"csrv7oi",
"csrww8s",
"csrxfl8",
"csrxhuz",
"csrxn85",
"csrxq80",
"csrxyhr",
"csry4jb",
"csry4lq",
"csry55o",
"csry8mm",
"csrybn5",
"csrybxk",
"csrylmv",
"csrysnx",
"csryulp",
"csryuq6",
"csrz3pd",
"csrzd2z",
"csrzr9p",
"css0436",
"css0emq",
"css1972",
"css1e2s",
"css1jwr",
"css1p3k",
"css1pz8",
"css2lme"
],
"score": [
1779,
13,
8,
41,
172,
16,
3,
5,
20,
2,
4,
2,
2,
3,
3,
18,
4,
2,
18,
8,
3,
3,
2,
6,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"We are not in an era of televised war. There's nobody on the ground filming western nations deploying troops because that's not how ISIS is being engaged. \n\nThere's no warning for the press to get some great action shots of a drone strike, which is how the US primarily is fighting ISIS. Nobody wants a ground war after \"Mission Accomplished.\" This is not a fight that can dominate the airwaves in the same way as previous wars; instead we *hear* about Drone Strike success days after they happen. \n\nThe real media coverage is coming from terrorist attacks conducted by ISIS. I assure you they are being taken seriously, but nobody has engaged in a ground war with them. ",
"The whole situation in Iraq has been created by Western intervention in that country, and Syria is 4 years in to a very messy civil war. Sending troops or engaging them could make things worse at this point and perhaps create more generations of terrorists who remember having their houses blown up by US jets as a kid. At the moment the best solution is to slow down their advances with air strikes, engage them with special forces on small missions and support the Kurdish forces who are fighting them on the ground. An all out bombing campaign on their main cities will only cause mass civilian casualties and a ground war/invasion of Iraq (Part III) or Syria is completely out of the question. \n\n\nFour years ago the UK was talking about bombing Syria's government forces. Now they are talking about bombing Syria's rebel forces/IS in Syria, all because of a terrorist attack in Tunisia (Which happened because of military intervention and air strikes on Colonel Gaddafi in Libya). The lesson we are slowly learning is that engaging a country in war - like the Iraq invasion - only leaves a vacuum for a potentially worse group to seize power. ",
"That's simply not true. The UK government is *again* trying to gain permission/votes to start bombing in Syria. David Cameron's original proposal back in 2013~ was rejected, so we did little about it.",
"You need to clarify what you mean by \"nations taking them seriously\". Which nations do you want to be involved and what do you want them to do?",
"It's not very easy to describe the problem because it's a complex one, born of a lot of different factors. Part of the reason that we're not seeing as big of a push against ISIS has to do with the fact that ISIS is kind of convenient for a lot of groups that are actively seeking to continue radical destabilization in the region. ISIS isn't enough of a direct threat to the foreign interest groups operating in the area, so there's some action being taken, but certainly not a full blown campaign like with saw with Qaddafi or Saddam. A lot of it is being fought either by proxy, or with drone strikes. Why send your own boots on the ground when you can arm other people or send an unmanned drone, fed off metadata? It's still good money for the defense contractors, and it allows the U.S. gov to maintain the facade of not being involved. Obama promised to bring our troops home, and technically, with most of them, he did. When Saudi Arabia began their bombing campaign against Yemen, we were told the U.S. would not be involved in bombing Yemen. However what they didn't say was that they would be providing targets, information and meta-data to the Saudis, so the U.S. wasn't dropping any bombs, but they were setting up the positioning, lining up the shot, just for Saudi Arabia to pull the trigger.\n\nThe other problem, is that sure, you can keep fighting ISIS, but if you were to stamp them out, another extremist Islamist group would pop up in their place. When you reduce a region to a smoking crater, when you slaughter families and destroy infrastructure, when you fund contemptuous groups and take everything away from people who already had close to nothing, you're basically corralling them into the extremist corner because that's all that they can turn to in their grief and rage. Add to this that Saudi Wahhabism goes entirely unchecked, that Saudi money is continuously funneled through and to these groups, you're just asking for this to continue. Syria has a 4 way war going right now with no end in sight, Yemen is under siege by the Saudis... still... Iraq was torn apart. The area is a mess because we in the West began imposing borders and fucking around and everything has gone steadily downhill before reaching a tremendous shitty crescendo at the turn of the century, as if we didn't learn anything about arbitrary border imposition from the state of Africa. We primed the region for Islamic extremism, and it's going to continue to thrive unless we cut off the foreign interest groups (exploitative corporations...) and start offering the right kind of aid (local contracting of infrastructure projects.... instead of auctioning off to private american companies which don't even do the job properly) however there is no interest in that kind of restructuring. It's going to continue being a warzone, especially to keep Russia's hands tied. You think it was out of the goodness of America's heart that former Soviet occupied states were overthrown/liberated? Nah. It's in NATO's best interest to keep the area destabilized, even if it is at the expense of millions of people's lives. It's a multi-pronged issue, not everyone is on the same side but not everyone who is on different sides are enemies. There's no clear cut solution to the ISIS problem in the short term, and no one is ever interested in long-term solutions.",
"My crazy conspiracy theory is that most 1st world nations want isis, and most terrorists to stay in Iraq/Syria and fight each other & amongst themselves. \n ISIS call other nut jobs to come join their state, which allows the nutjobs to leave the first world nation to go shoot other brown people in the desert instead of being radicalised and blowing themselves up in the western nations. ",
"'Intervening in a religious civil war', is super hard and a failed attempt to do so happened within short-term political memory.\n\nIt's a great way to shovel money into a big hole and never see any of it again. If you're not a republican looking for re-election, why would you bother?\n",
"There's going to be a new boogie man in 8-10 years. It used to be Al Qaeda, now it's ISIS. Remember when it used to the Russians? And before that the Germans. The US loves to plaster a specific nationality on its 24 hours news cycles so people can point their fingers at the bad guy. ",
"It seems like a lot of people in this thread (including OP) think that no one is doing anything to stop ISIS. And some even have retarded conspiracy theories that the West wants ISIS to gain power and further destabilize the region... So I thought I would just share this link: _URL_0_\n\nThis article talks about who all is involved in stopping ISIS. Spoiler alert: about 40 countries. ",
"Because they are a religion, not a race or country, they are widespread, if 100% of isis personel were in one place, that place would have been bombed a long time ago. but you cannot kill isis without injuring innocent muslims. Kinda like the golden mask guys in game of thrones.",
"1. Iran is fighting ISIS in a serious way to back their ally and proxy in Baghdad. \" Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps...are increasingly on the front lines battling Islamic State alongside motivated Iraqi forces.\" [source](_URL_3_)\n\n2. Some Arab counties are backing the Kurds fighting ISIS and trying to fix this, but getting heavy push back from the US who insists all aid go through Baghdad. One of \"the core complaints of the Kurds is that the Iraqi army has abandoned so many weapons in the face of Isil attack, the Peshmerga are fighting modern American weaponry with out-of-date Soviet equipment.\" [source](_URL_4_) The Kurdish aspect of this makes Turkey an interesting variable because \"Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan dislikes the Kurdish militias almost as much as ISIS.\" [source](_URL_0_)\n\n\n3. The American air campaign is serious, though maybe it's tough to win by air power alone and especially when attacks on the Syrian part of ISIS's terrority is harder to attack. Politically, we will not put boots on the ground in Iraq again under Obama. I also don't think ISIS poses a direct threat to the American homeland that Al-Qaeda under bin Laden did. As much as ISIS propaganda hopes to inspire lone wolf type attacks here at home, it does not seem to have the obsessive focus on fighting the [\"far enemy\"](_URL_2_) with planned operations like AQ.\n\n4. According to this [book](_URL_1_), Syria has a complex relationship with ISIS (and the rival Islamist Al Nusra front). Initially, if you believe this book, Assad tried to focus on the Free Syrian army and other \"moderate\" elements of the armed opposition in order to make the opposition unacceptable to Western backers (and feed his narrative that he fighting a war on terror). Now it seems he is trying to fight ISIS as he is an weak position (but still backed by Russia and Iran so may be able to survive).\n\n5. There will not be a decisive Sunni awakening like in 2007 in Iraq again until (i) Iraq's central gov't acts in non-secretarian way, something that gets harder as Iran and Shiite militias take a more central role in keeping the Baghdad government in power (ii) it makes logical sense, a lot of the Sunnis who took up arms against Zarqawi like folks in 2007 got burned by the Iraqi government who did not pay them and the arrested them during Maliki's highly divisive, pro-Shia regime. Without a viable political alternative (the real failure of the so called surge), there is no reason for Sunnis to rise up against ISIS who may disgust them but still protects their sect.\n\nTo me, ISIS seems a lot like the Taliban before 9/11. Superficially, both try to return to the \"way of the prophet\" (destroying artifacts that are not from their idea of Islam, whether in Palmria or Bamiyan to doing horrific, backward things like throwing gay people off buildings). They have outside backers (Pakistan in the Talibans case, wealthy donors from the Gulf for ISIS). They both are outrageous enough to get our attention, but not so threatening to core national interests that we go \"all in\". They both found a vacuum and exploit the competing and complex national interests of regional governments in the area.\n\nIf 9/11 does not happen or the Taliban turned over Bin Laden (something maybe they could not do because he had embedded himself with the Taliban well, but seems like it was a misstep by the Taliban to try to fight the USA), then they would never have lost power. As long as ISIS does not do something stupid and over play its hand by trying to attack the American or other Western targets with a big speculator attack (rather than lone wolfs on shooting rampages), they will persist for some time because they have found a niche in a regional power vacuum.\n",
"Because they are a powerless warlord group in the desert with no airforce, infrastructure, navy, satellites...etc. The only modern weapons they have are the ones us and the saudis gave them. I'm pretty sure we only know about them because some of our missiles were getting old and the American/British public shot down the idea of using them on Syria the first time. When your country is run by hammer manufacturers you'll do anything to find some nails.",
"Destroy Isis and the west lose all negotiation power against Assad. And the west doesn't like him. So the west try to support \"moderate\" groups arming them and training them. Yet again these groups seems as extrem as Isis. So now the west not even doesn't have any alternative for a group to support besides Isis. Isis is also used a leverage. An of course many would benefit I the war keeps going in Syria. The country is already hurt and hurting it further will only increase the money that can be made -either by loans or contracts to rebuild. Third point is a lot of the US allies in the region don't see Isis as a threat. Israel have already treated a lot if their injured soldiers, you can see plenty of reports on Israeli TV on this matter online, and Israel consider Isis as a lesser threat to Assad and hezballa. And the other ally Saudi Arabia, well that a too easy. SA is the one that was practically finding them from the start. Now why would Isis bite the hand that feed it.",
"1) It's not growing, it's actually shrinking. The Iraqi government in conjunction with the Shia militias have been progressively taking ISIS territory for more than 8 months. The media narrative presents an image that is the exact opposite, partly because a lot of journalists are on the payroll of Sunni Arab backers, and partly because it makes a good story.\n\n2) ISIS is not a serious threat to most of the word. It is a primitive state which manages to survive on donations from wealth gulf arabs, selling oil at huge discounts on the black market, and extortion. The threat only comes from terrorist attacks in the form we have seen in France, which are a problem but are dwarfed by less glamorous problems, such as over-crowding, poverty, lack of social mobility, cost of living. \n\nSo in summary: ISIS is not winning, and they are not a serious threat to the West.\n ",
"No advantage for the bankers to get involved, so they don't tell their government puppets to intervene",
"If you have played any of the Civilization games; when there is a barbarian camp near one of your opponents cities and they can't keep up with its spawn rate - which results in severely hindered development - would you take out the barbarian camp or would you just let it sit there for a while?",
"Well, they're actually losing. The kurds already won the equivalent of stalingrad in kobane, and now theyve cut isis off from their main supply route.",
"This might get buried but I'll try to explain as simple as possible. Isis is backed by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, politically and economically. These countries have a very close relationship with west and at the same time they are using isis against Shia movments in the region which is directly getting support from Iran. Iran on the other hand isn't really bothered with isis, Because they have found a reason to \"help\" the neighboring countries with this problem, but in reality they are following their own agenda and trying to get more influence in these countries, specifically Irak, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain and so on. And finally west gets to sell their weapons to the worried regims in the region and at the same time has a leverage on all of them. So basically everybody wins and nobody wants to remove these savages in the near future. ",
"There are good reasons to believe ISIS is not a credible long-term threat. \n\n* For a group to be stable, it needs some common goal, ideology, or *something* to unite it. There is nothing similar in ISIS. It is a diverse group united against something. Such organizations are good at rapid conquest, but bad at governance. They lack long-term coherence and stability. Left to its own devices, ISIS is likely to disintegrate on its own. \n* There is minimal support for ISIS among the conquered. No one likes them. No one has an alternative, so there isn't much active resistance, but if an alternative were to come around, no one would help them. \n* There is no political support for ISIS. They cannot become a credible government without recognition. \n* They are likely contained. They are unlikely to be able to spread beyond failed states. Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Iran would have no trouble resisting them. Turkey, probably as well. The only territory they could possibly go after would be Lebanon. \n* They have rather minimal control. On a map, it looks like a lot of land. It's mostly desert with almost no people. Even as weak as the governments of Iraq and Syria are, they control almost all of the population centers. It's actually very hard to police a sparsely populated desert. \n\nSo, overall, ISIS is unlikely to pose a global threat, and it is likely to degenerate into local warlords and jihadist groups with different ideologies duking it out among themselves. It's a problem like Darfur or Congo -- great humanitarian crisis, but nothing which actually impacts anyone outside of the conflict zone. \n\nI suspect the key reasons we care about it a little bit are oil, and stated goal of taking down the west. The state goal poses a little bit of danger if the situation evolves in an unpredicted direction. ",
"I believe that outside of the direct area and terrorist fear mongering, ISIS doesn't have the capabilities for any direct assault on a foreign country. This is a regional conflict being fought with foreign weapons. They obviously have the support of much of the religious community, despite what media is trying to get us to believe. \n\nISIS may be far right on the democratic scale but it has a functioning system of governance on the areas they have 'reclaimed'. \n\nMaybe. What do i know, i'm 6000 miles away.",
"I feel like the most ELI5 answer might be that your basic premise is completely wrong.\n\nEvery nation seems to be taking them very seriously.",
"I'm very glad you asked this question.\n\nIf it seems strange to you that ISIS was allowed to grow from being, in the words of President Obama, the \"JV team\" of terrorists into a full-blow terrorist state, well, you're not the only one.\n\nThe truth that we all know implicitly, but won't say aloud is that ISIS could have been--and still could be destroyed hastily. The reason this hasn't happened is because ISIS, like Al Qaeda before it, exists in its current form as a direct intentional result of U.S. foreign policy.\n\nConsider where ISIS has arisen from. Syria, Iraq and Libya. The United States utterly destroyed Iraq and Libya, and is now gunning for Syria. Why? Both Iraq and Syria are within Iran's sphere of influence. Qaddafi had been a thorn in the side of the U.S. for decades, constantly trying to create an African Union with a currency which would be cut off from the United States petrodollar. Before his demise, he nearly succeeded.\n\nThe situation in the Middle East is only hopelessly confusing if you believe the inane schizophrenic propaganda our media is pumping out. In actuality, the Middle East is being torn apart by a mega proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia/Israel. Iran in turn is distantly backed by Russia/China. The Saudis, as we know, are our guys.\n\nThe reason that the ISIS \"JV team\" blew up into what it is is because it has gorged itself on the wreckage that NATO has purposely left in its path.\n\n[Iran recently held an international cartoon contest \"in order to reveal the *true nature* of the Islamic State.\"](_URL_0_)\n\nI know mindless hatred of Iran is in vogue right now because of [Western propaganda](_URL_1_), but if anyone knows the true nature of ISIS, it's the nation that finds itself encircled by the so-called Islamic State.\n\nLet's just say that Saudi Arabia and Israel don't have a thing to worry about.",
"I think ISIS are being taken seriously by many. The Assad Government is holding its ground in many areas against the rebels, but the western media can't show that because it would be them giving credibility to a \"corrupt dictatorship\". And the Iraqi forces are yet to demonstrate they are capable of challenging ISIS' territorial control in Iraq. And the Kurds do make occasional territorial gains in Iraq, then it's the front page story for a week on the BBC. ",
"I think the answer is obvious. Basically, nobody wants to deal with the problem in a serious manner.\n\nBombing them is a token effort. Everybody knows that it can't SOLVE the problem altogether.\n\nWhat we would actually need to do is put troops on the ground. We would need to actually spend serious time and money to occupy the affected areas, train up local militaries, help them form competent governments etc. But:\n\nIt is hugely costly. Europe can't really afford it right now, and many of our militaries are out of date. The US can't really afford it either, if we're honest.\n\nIt will cost thousands of soldiers' lives and be extremely unpopular with the public.\n\nIt has massive geopolitical consequences. It would be yet more fiddling in the Middle East, creates more propaganda against us when we inevitably kill civilians etc.\n\nAnd even then, removing ISIS wouldn't \"fix\" the Middle East or cure the general problem of extremism.\n\nFinally, at the end - what do we gain from it, really? I just don't think that the western countries care all that much. There isn't the political will, or the economic/financial/strategic motivation to really try and fix the problem. So we offer some air strikes, do some spying, try to supply some humanitarian relief where we can. But nobody particularly wants to get involved any more than they have to.",
"My country just sent several CF-18 fighters over and bombed them, so I'm not sure what you mean by \"there is no military presence\".",
"You haven't seen any progress in attempts to stop them because they are hired by major Western governments to perpetuate instability in the Middle East. \n\nThey would be crushed in two minutes if the US gov't desired so.\n\nWhat does a calm middle east mean? That means everybody in the US military has to go home. What does that mean? That means: a lot less cash for weapons manufacturers, weapons traffickers, private military contractors, The Pentagon, and all of the others that cash in on international war. \n\nDo you really believe that there is an Islamic Terrorist Group that Al Qaeda itself says adheres to no guidelines or has no real goal, operating right in Israel's back yard for over one year without once ever threatening Israel or attacking it? That is led by a white man whose followers don't even have beards? (Very \"Islamic\"). \n\nIf you believe that, I have a bridge on Mars I'd like to sell you. ",
"They actually aren't growing, the media just likes to sensationalize and extremist groups like this tend to make more noise when they are getting desperate. In general, ISIS is getting their asses kicked. 1000's have died in airstrikes and [the kurds have advanced within 30 miles of their capital in Raqqa](_URL_0_).\n\nThey are like a big bully that has run out of little kids to push around, and some much bigger kids have showed up at the playground to teach them a lesson. They will go down kicking and screaming but they are completely outmatched.\n\n_URL_4_\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_2_\n\n_URL_3_",
"Think we'll start to see battles on the ground now they are getting close to Israel, but I think realistically no one really has the money to go to an all out war, I know for example Britain downsized their military, and most of NATO has one eye on what Putin is up to.",
"There are a couple of reasons for this.\n\nFirst, declaring war on an ideology is political suicide these days. Liberals will just call any statement saying the need to take out radical Islam, \"racist\" and the media will play the story like crazy. This being presidential season, no one is willing to take that risk and kill their party's campaign chances.\n\nSecondly, ISIS is not an actual county YET. I have always felt that they are waiting for them to take a large enough swath of land that is purely ISIS so they can decimate that area without anyone yelling about point number one. \n\nFinally, the middle east and Islam in general is a mess. There are lots of subgroups of Islam that all hate each other for not being \"true\" muslims, so you get a situation where if you help one group get stability, the other groups get more extreme to take that one down. This is a problem because if you put, say, the Kurds in power, and kick the other two out of a country, then situation number one happens again.\n\nThe only way to solve the middle east problem is to either make it a proxy US/EU state and basically run the country for them (which will never happen), or let them kill each other until one group reigns completely supreme, but this is a problem for Isreal which is a whole other issue.",
"IMO, it has less to do with the media and more to do with the nature of the threat, and the results of a modern war.\n\nA. ISIS is a regional threat. Outside of small recruited attackers in far off lands, there is zero chance in the short to mid term of ISIS taking over a world power. The day that becomes a threat, you'll see a different war on ISIS.\n\nB. After the results of the War on Terror, nations realize that the way of fighting war's that they know are of limited effectiveness. They also are not popular. The war on terror has a success in terms of the number of enemy forces vs. allied deaths. Last I heard it was quite skewed against the enemy. That said, there was a lot of reporting on allied deaths, and the enemy fought an nontraditional war where they would allow limited gains, leave and return back.\n\nFinally, the war setup the next enemy that we fight today, the question has to be asked, if we go to war with ISIS, will we create a new enemy, one that has learned from a generation and a half of war and is more dangerous?\n\nAll this signals a force that we are not prepared to destroy.",
"Probably too late for this to be noticed, but ISIS is losing ground fast for the last month +.\n\nSince they took Ramadi, they've been losing in Baiji, Fallujah is surrounded and an attack is expected any day, the Peshmerga is just sitting outside Mosul waiting for the Iraqis to be ready to retake the city, they lost Tal Abyad and the PYG/J is within 30km of their capitol Raqqa, Sarrin has been surrounded and will likely fall in the next few days, and their counterattack in Hasakah is dead in the water.\n\nIf you're interested in what's actually happening in Syrian, /r/SyrianCivilWar is a really good subreddit.",
"To shed some backlight about myself to give credibility before I start shitting out my view on this. I'm an American Iraqi from Chicago currently using Reddit on 3rd World WiFi in Iraq. I'm here visiting some family for about another month or so. PM or some shit if you want actual proof or something but as for now that's my background . ISIS is a very very very real threat here and its a common fear among most people here, even to my dad who lost most of his family to Saddam's regime. I remember him asking me the day we were driving from Kuwait into Iraq if I would be willing to take up arms against ISIS when the time came. I didn't take him seriously. Pro army videos and songs are all over tv and social media and they have posters of martyrs everywhere. Anti ISIS is a huge thing and believe it or not many soldiers and police use Facebook and instagram to broadcast some of what's going on. All I can do is assure you that the Iraqi armed forces are doing everything and anything to stop this threat but it's getting quite hard to contain a threat like that. A lot of my cousins and friends here are joining military training and I really hate to say it but help from a foreign military force would make things so much worse. God speed you patriotic sons of bitches bc we don't celebrate 4th of July here :("
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.newsweek.com/us-resumes-bombing-against-isis-positions-it-builds-coalition-270845"
],
[],
[
"http://theweek.com/speedreads/444703/heres-why-turkey-isnt-helping-save-syrias-kobani-from-isis",
"http://www.amazon.com/ISIS-Inside-Terror-Michael-Weiss/dp/1941393578",
"https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/2005-11-01/far-enemy-why-jihad-went-global",
"http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/06/05/to-save-iraq-the-u-s-military-must-work-with-irans-revolutionary-guard/",
"http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11712237/US-blocks-attempts-by-Arab-allies-to-fly-heavy-weapons-directly-to-Kurds-to-fight-Islamic-State.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://twitter.com/FGunay1/status/603263314651652096/photo/1",
"http://www.infiniteunknown.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Iran-USA.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33234648",
"http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/new-isis-threats-and-boasts-show-caliphate-in-decline-1.3034144",
"http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/01/the-decline-of-isis-syria-iraq/384261/",
"http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/02/20/isil-is-in-decline-says-u-s-military-as-it-unveils-details-of-plan-to-retake-mosul/",
"http://www.vox.com/2015/4/15/8410501/ISIS-losing-Iraq"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5o3x4x | how does "double-jumping" on a trampoline work? | What energy transfer happens? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5o3x4x/eli5_how_does_doublejumping_on_a_trampoline_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcggjat",
"dcgh9a2",
"dcgstt2",
"dch17ah"
],
"score": [
66,
18,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Double jumping occurs when you are jumping on the trampoline with another person and the jumps are timed in such a way that the stored energy of two people landing at the same time is converted to kinetic energy and applied to a single person. Basically, both people land, applying the weight of both bodies, but one person removes their weight first, basically doubling the rebound effect of the trampoline on the second person causing them to get bounced much higher. ",
"The first person lands on the mat while the second person is in the air. The first person presses the mat down as far as they can when they land; first person is now stopped and waiting for their boost back upwards. A second person lands on the compressed mat at that exact moment, pressing it down even further. The mat falls out from under the first jumper, who is bracing for a boost back up which never arrives. The second jumper has stolen the energy in the mat from the first jumper, and gets twice the boost... a double-jump. ",
"The farther you pull back a bowstring, the farther the arrow flies. Similarly, the farther you push down a tramp, the higher you'll bounce. When Billy double bounces Jeff, launching Jeff, Billy is pushing the tramp down right before Jeff lands. Thus when Jeff lands it is pushed down even farther than if Jeff landed by himself. The trick is that if Billy now stays standing on the tramp knees locked like Jeff, it will launch them both the same. But Billy quickly tucks his knees. While Billy is falling with knees tucked, the tramp is pushed down as far as the weight of two people can push it, but there is only one person standing on it, Jeff. \n\nIt's a similar situation to if Jeff holds a cinder block on his head while jumping on the tramp and then at the very bottom of one bounce throws the cinder block away.",
"Imagine a big slingshot, and you and your friend are launching yourselves with it, by putting yourself in the pouch, and walking back as far as you can go, stretching the slingshit, until it overcomes you and launches you. \n\nNow imagine that you get an idea, and you and your friend both get in the pouch and start walking. With two of you instead of one, you stretch it much further, but just as the slingshot overcomes you both, your friend drops to the grass and out of the pouch."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bvok5h | what is 'total football' actually? and why was it so effective for the dutch? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bvok5h/eli5_what_is_total_football_actually_and_why_was/ | {
"a_id": [
"epr8qrb"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Essentially, it means that any outfield player in a team can play in any of the outfield positions. This means that a player with the ball can head forward and attack the opposition, and a team mate can fill in behind them, retaining the structure of the team set up. It was popularised by the Dutch national side in the early 70’s, who featured everyone’s favourite football Jedi, Johan Cruyff."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
brvzes | how do sound waves get louder when they are bouncing around a resonating chamber, like in a guitar? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/brvzes/eli5_how_do_sound_waves_get_louder_when_they_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"eogzzjm",
"eohx4kb"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"The sounds keep bouncing around in the chamber until they find their way out (the hole in the guitar). Since there is only one way out of the chamber, the soundwaves get aimed in one direction; a person standing in that direction will hear the sound more loudly because the sound is less spread out and more hits them.\n\nIt's like a water hose with an adjustable nozzle, the more narrow you make the stream, the more intense (or loud in the case of sound) the stream will be.",
"A guitar works very similar to a drum, which you will notice when you slap a guitar - it sounds like a drum. A banjo even has a skin like a drum, and no hole.\n\nThe difference is that rather than slapping the drum with sticks, the vibrations from the strings are transferred to the thin wood of the body through a part called the \"bridge\", that is the piece of wood at the very bottom of the strings. The resonances inside the body help with absorbing the vibrations from the wood and turning them into sound energy, which is why the shape and material of the guitar is so important for its sound. It does not amplify the sound energy from the string, which don't produce much sound at all.\n\nThe hole serves two purposes: It lets out the sound waves and directs them towards the front. But it also works the same way as a bass-reflex hole in a subwoofer: Air rushing out of the hole creates an underpressure inside, which then sucks air in, creating an overpressure, pushing air out... This effect is known as [Helmholtz resonance](_URL_0_), the effect that also makes instruments such as flutes work. In a guitar, they serve the same purpose as in a subwoofer: They allow the guitar to produce very deep sounds with a fairly small body."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmholtz_resonance"
]
] |
||
8a40zi | why around major cities is it poor/dangerous/ghetto? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8a40zi/eli5_why_around_major_cities_is_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwvo1bc",
"dwvoo91",
"dwvpwlv",
"dwvs2pg"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Because live near to the center is always expensive, and this makes people to create small \"villages\" around the cities to have were to live with a affordable price",
"Poor people moved to the city back when it meant cheeper living and more jobs. Then everyone wanted to move away from all the poor people, so they left the city, taking a lot of jobs with them, and the poor people were never able to move out of the city like everyone else because they were poor. \n\nDangerous because poverty invites crime. Ghetto because people started calling it that, but I think ghetto was originally where Jews were sent during holocaust. ",
"Cities have, until recently, generally been segregated on the basis of race, peerage (a sort of medieval concept not unlike race), or, in more recent times, simply income. In general, people do not like to live near people who are below them on the social ladder, opting instead to surround themselves with the most exclusive company they can obtain.\n\nThis has sometimes been legally enforced, sometimes financially, and sometimes, violently. Regardless, it means that the downtrodden usually end up having to congregate together in areas where the wealthy don't want to live. Particularly after the invention of the automobile, it became easier and easier for the wealthy and middle classes to self-segregate.\n\nThese poorer communities are typically underserved by government. Different countries and regions allocate the responsibilities of government differently, but the worst slums are all in areas where policing and education are locally funded. The poor cannot easily afford good services in these areas, and unless wealthier areas are paying for them in poor areas, they create intergenerational poverty.\n\nLegal or social status can also impact the ability of people to leave or improve these areas. Historically in the United States, a tremendous amount of government effort went into preserving racial segregation, and African Americans have rarely been treated equally before the law. This has led to severe intergenerational poverty, where lack of access to fully funded health, education, and community-oriented policing initiatives are self-perpetuating forms segregation, without any formal law enforcing it. Worse, this is often treated as an excuse for African Americans to be treated differently by the police.\n\nPoorer neighborhoods will always have a bad reputation, deserved or not, and many 'notorious' ghettos haven't been notorious, statistically speaking, for quite some time. They all still bear the marks of intergenerational poverty, however, except in places where governments have put in an effort to ensure that education, health, and crime outcomes in poor neighborhoods catch up to rich ones.",
"A city usually starts out with an industrial/commercial core, where all the jobs are. As the city grows, people don't want to live next to factories and trains, so the people with cars and flexible jobs move to the suburbs and those that can't stay behind and watch their neighborhoods crumble as they grow poorer. Finally, as the industries that founded the city move or close down, the city center those loses jobs as well, trapping the poor even further."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3ocjv9 | why does stress make people age faster? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ocjv9/eli5_why_does_stress_make_people_age_faster/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvvz13g",
"cvw2mo3",
"cvw56zz",
"cvw63iq",
"cvw7agr",
"cvw7nyw",
"cvw94h7",
"cvwgus2",
"cvwj892",
"cvwo4bp",
"cvwooon",
"cvwwqgb"
],
"score": [
495,
22,
2,
2,
5,
17,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"**As people have pointed out, this explanation is only a part of the story. There are many factors causing aging through stress, and many factors causing stress, I am basing this explanation on what I know. If you need more information I will do some more research and try to post a more in depth explanation taking into account as many factors as possible. I do not intend to mislead anyone**\n\nOur body is made up of trillions of cells, which in turns carries chromosomes. At the end of each chromosome, there is something called a telomeres. \n\nEvery time I cell divides, the length of its telomeres become shorter, making its life a little shorter too. \n\nAnything that causes our cells (our building blocks) to age will in turn make us age too. So, the shorter the telomeres in our cells become, the older we get. \n\nWhen we get stressed, we overproduce our hormones. There is an observed correlation between higher hormone levels and shorter telomere length, and therefore a shorter cell life. \n\nBasically when we produce too many hormones through stress, our cells age a little quicker because the telomeres become even shorter after dividing, and when our cells age quicker, so do we. \n\nSource: took a human biology class last year",
"There is a feedback loop in your body called the HPA Axis. This is a communication network between the hypothalamus (important for the most basic of biologic functioning in your body), the pituitary gland, and the adrenal glands in your body. When your body undergoes emotionally (work stress) or physically stressful (dying from exposure to the cold) situations your body releases a series of hormones that activate this stress relay. \n\nReacting to stressful environments is perfectly normal and is actually beneficial for survival as the release of ACTh (adrenocorticotrophin hormone) and the subsequent release of cortisol/corticosterone enhance your mental faculties, the activation of voluntary and involuntary muscle fiber, increase the rate of breathing and blood flow throughout your body, to assist you in surviving whatever stressful environment you're in. Overtime, once you get out of the stressful environment, there is a negative feedback loop with ACTh levels. This means much like how once your house reaches a certain temperature the thermostat turns off, once the body senses a certain level of ACTh the production is ceased and eventually the cortisol and ACTh is used up in your blood and you return to your base metabolic state.\n\nThe issue is that when you are continuously exposed to stressful environments and you do not have a chance to really recover, this feedback becomes overwhelmed because the negative feedback of ACTh is turned off and you continue to produce and release stress sensitive hormones that over time have an adverse effect on your body. Much like how testosterone can wear and tear on your body, inflated levels of adrenaline can also wear on your heart muscle, your brain, and could have cascading effects on overall health. These effects could be related to accelerated aging in the form of chronic health conditions and an overall decrease of general health. Locations particularly sensitive to increased levels of ACTh and adrenaline are your heart, your amygdala (controlling emotions), your hippocampus (production and storage of long term memories), some sections of your prefrontal cortex (who YOU are). \n\nSource: PhD failure studying morphological and physiological changes due to stress. ",
"Your body works overtime when you are stressed. The extra strain on the body can damage parts of your brain that regulate your bodily functions, like heartbeating and breathing. If your brain were damaged, then it cannot regulate your body as well, so your body becomes slightly damaged. Overtime this contributes to the wear of your body. The wearing out of your body and the symptoms of old age are the same thing.",
"Stress basically happens when your body focuses on solving an immediate short-term problem to the detriment of a long-term problems. After all, aging more slowly hardly matters if you get eaten by a predator or die of disease tomorrow. But if stresses are long term, the body never gets a chance to recover.",
"Firstly, stress is non-specific, which means than any change to which our body is exposed is the definition of stress. Whenever we experienced acute episodes of unusual change, or prolonged change; for instance, childhood abuse, getting fired from out job, winning a million dollars, our body first releases corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH), causing the pituitary gland to secrete adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH). This hormone then reaches the adrenal gland through the blood stream. The adrenal cortex then produces cortisol, and this suppresses the immune system to allow our bodies to focus all of our energies on any immediate dangers (e.g. a lion or bear chases us and, wham, this kicks starts this process). Although this is an extreme example, any change can cause an uptick in this process. Long term stress can then propel this system into chronic engagement and this can, in turn, prevent our immune system from 'resetting' itself. Now, stress also releases a cascade of pro-inflammatory molecules, cytokines, and if the chronic stress prevents the immune system from resetting itself through the release of anti-inflammatory molecules, then, the current thinking goes, it may account for increased prevalence of depression and other emotional disorders, but also allergies, autoimmune diseases, cardio-vascular disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes and dementia. Even the mere anticipation of injury an amplify inflammation and if the stress endures then cortisol keeps the immune system disengaged and, we are more susceptible to illness. Over the course of several years, for instance several years of child abuse or abuse by a bully boss, the stress can permanently damage the signaling ballet between CRH, ACTH, and the feedback loop between anti and pro inflammatory molecules. Not only does this result is weaker immune response, which can fail to protect us from infections, it also affects neurotransmitters responsible for mood, such as serotonin, dopamine, acetyl-choline, which can cause us to feel fatigued, withdrawn, and isolative, similar to symptoms of, say, the flu, which prompt us to avoid others which, in turn, minimizes contact and decreases the chances of contact sufficient to spread the infection. Both perceived stress [like your teacher of boss hate you] and chronic stress result in higher oxidative stress, lower telomerase activity, and shorter telomere length, which are known determinants of cell senescence and longevity, at least this is the current thinking. ",
"My adrenal glands were removed when I was 13 due to Cushing's Disease. I am now 50 and look more than a decade younger. Physically I'm the same as I was when I was in my mid twenties. Not being able to produce my own Cortisol, etc, has some major drawbacks though. I'm always behind in my ability to deal with physical and emotional stress. Not having enough makes you feel like you are very dehydrated or worse. ",
"One thing I've always wondered too is delayed stress reactions. When I have a really stressful day, I get a horrible stomach ache later in the day or the next day once the stressor is gone. Anyone have any thoughts? ",
"Can you explain whey when I get stressed I start getting grey hairs, but once I am no longer stressed my hair goes back to brown? This has happened to me twice in the past 2 years. I start to notice a couple grey hairs, then once the stress is gone they go away. I have even found a hair that was brown grey and brown again.\n\nAlso I am 24",
"There are a few good answers on here and they are all right to a certain degree. Here is another degree of correct. Simply, stress causes our body to form an inflammatory response. Over time the body's \"alarm\" state is continually being used. The body then forms resistance to this constant alarm/stress. After that the body's resistance mechanisms become exhausted and that forms chronic disease like heart issues or diabetes. Some of our chronic disease can be traced back to high levels of stress and adrenal hormones and cortisol. ",
"This is a super good documentary on the issue:\n\n_URL_0_",
"College student here. Stress brings on bad habits. Midterms next week and I've been so stressed studying I've let other aspects slide like nutritious meals, drinking more caffeine now, etc",
"This TED talk posits that stress only shortens your life if you think of it as a bad thing. If you think of it as a helpful natural reaction to challenging conditions, you're fine. Seems hokey but she's got the data.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYG0ZuTv5rs"
],
[],
[
"https://www.ted.com/talks/kelly_mcgonigal_how_to_make_stress_your_friend?language=en"
]
] |
||
7i7gn1 | how does pink noise actually work? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7i7gn1/eli5_how_does_pink_noise_actually_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqwod6u",
"dqwqipg",
"dqx6a19"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"How does it work at _______?\n\nI’m not sure of what you’re trying to figure out. \n\nIf your question was phrased “what is pink noise”, I’d be able to answer:\n\nPink Noise is sound where each octave (doubling of a frequency) contains equal amount of energy. Acoustic Energy is expressed in dB.\n\nE.g. \n100Hz - 200 Hz contains the same amount of energy as 1kHz - 2kHz even though the span between the higher frequencies are 10x that of the span between the lower frequencies. So the energy is *spread out more* as you approach higher frequencies. 10kHz - 20kHz has the *same amount of energy* as 100Hz -200Hz but has 100x as many frequencies. Again, the energy is spread out even more. \n\nThis relationship between frequencies results in a slope where each doubling of the frequency results in -3dB of energy. ",
"Fun fact: if your ears are tired from long exposure to sound, listening to pink noise for a while can “reset” your ears for a bit. I do this as a mix engineer all the time. It’s not a permanent fix, more like a workaround for late night projects. It’s also a good tool for getting a quick balancing of levels. ",
"It depends on what you're using it for.\n\nPink noise is commonly used by audio engineers to figure out how the size, shape, and construction of a room effects the audio from a sound system. They play it through the speakers and then capture it using a microphone. They using an analyzer to compare the original signal with what the mic captured to see the effect the room has on the sound. \n\nThis allows them to make changes to the way the system is tuned in order to have the best sounding experience for the audience. \n\nOne of the side benefits of pink noise is that your brain is good at tuning it out as \"unimportant\" after a while. This can be used cleverly to drown out unwanted noise. If you play pink noise loud enough to cover up the unwanted noise, your brain eventually will tune all of it out. So now you're removed unwanted noise by adding more noise.\n\nThese are the two most common uses for pink noise that I'm aware of. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4ar3kt | having never read the comics, why is batman vs superman if they're both good guys? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ar3kt/eli5_having_never_read_the_comics_why_is_batman/ | {
"a_id": [
"d12t915",
"d12tskt",
"d12u1zb"
],
"score": [
6,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Basically, Batman is worried that Superman is too powerful. Plus as an alien, whose side is he really on?",
"Well the movie universe is a bit different than the comic verse, though even in the Comics Batman has always kept a close eye on Superman (despite them being friends). In the movies, Superman is recently arrived on Earth, brought devastation to at least one city, and could wipe out the planet if he wanted to. Batman is deeply concerned about that kind of power and wants to take Superman down and make sure he isn't a threat to all of humanity.",
"You are likely to see a variety of responses that are dependent on what source material people choose to use in support of their answers. Thus /u/cammisar below seems to address the movie specifically, whereas /u/fleets91 seems to be focusing more on The Dark Knight trilogy from the late 1980s. They are both right. For me, the primary friction is Batman's vigilante, unapproved crime fighting vs Superman's officially sanctioned, if only tacitly, role. Add to that the complexity of Batman wondering what would happen if Superman or some other incredibly super powered being went nuts, or authoritarian fascist. A great series to read on the latter is Alan Moore's Miracleman."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4e00mb | why are there no politically aligned independent news networks? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4e00mb/eli5_why_are_there_no_politically_aligned/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1vuuwq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"What do you mean by \"politically aligned\" and \"independent\"?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5siuxr | how did people plan massive protests before the internet? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5siuxr/eli5_how_did_people_plan_massive_protests_before/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddfj3xe"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"people would meet and share posters and also phone each other with something called a \"phone tree\" so every single person would get a call then pass on the info to 2 more people by phone"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
33j8o8 | why is it legal for a cop to lie to a civilian but it is illegal for civilian to lie to a cop? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33j8o8/eli5_why_is_it_legal_for_a_cop_to_lie_to_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqledgs",
"cqlegos",
"cqlen2f",
"cqlg3yc",
"cqlh1i5",
"cqlhwpw",
"cqlhyme",
"cqli9sp",
"cqliiri"
],
"score": [
143,
31,
459,
84,
9,
2,
5,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"its not illegal to lie to a cop. there are absolutely no laws preventing you from lying to anyone except a judge in a court of law while under oath",
"Since when is it illegal to lie to a cop?\n\nHow many people have been arrested for blowing above the legal limit after saying \"I didn't have a drink, officer.\"\n\nThey aren't getting arrested for lying, they're getting arrested for being drunk behind the wheel. There's no legal penalty for lying, unless you're under oath.",
"Cop from California here. Not a crime. I can lie to you and you can lie to me.",
"The only answers here seem to be \"it's not illegal\". Which it kinda isn't. But no one has answered why there appears to be a disparity. \n\nSituation one: cop standing on a street corner where you are. He tips his hat and says \"how are you? \" you politely respond \"great officer\". Actually you are having a horrible day. You just lied to a cop. This is perfectly legal. You and the cop are engaged in \"consensual contact\". It is no different than if you lied to anyone else that was just talking to you.\n\nSituation two: you are walking by a storefront at night when you realize there's shattered glass on the ground. Just then a cop pulls up and confronts you. He asks you your name. You say \"John Doe\". This is a lie. If he discovers you have lied you can be arrested for providing a false name. This is illegal. \n\nContinuing situation two yet you provided a real name. He asks you where you were coming from and you respond \"Mars\". This is another lie. He can arrest you based on \"probable cause\" for breaking into the store. You are not arrested specifically for lying, but it is used as evidence you committed some other crime. \n\nIn situation two you are being \"detained\". Cops can do this based on a level of evidence referred to as \"reasonable and Articulable Suspicion\". Basically have you done something to arouse suspicion and can they put it into words. A hunch does not qualify. When you are being detained or are under arrest you are legally required to \"identify yourself\". The depth of that depends on the state. Some require only full name, others require what info is on your license. If you fail to or lie that is breaking the law. The purpose of detaining someone is to allow the officer to investigate the crime they suspect you if committing. They can and will ask you questions regarding that crime. Again the only thing you are required to do is identify yourself. In order to arrest you for that crime they need to obtain \"probable cause\" that you committed it. Lying about where you have been can be probable cause. \n\nIn general you should never lie to the cops. However you should also just never talk to them except to identify yourself. ",
"The best advice is do not speak to the police. Only speak to police if you have an attorney with you.",
"It's illegal to lie to hinder a criminal investigation. If a cop were to lie in a way that hindered a criminal investigation, that would be illegal too.\n\nSo if a civilian lied to a cop and it wasn't hindering an investigation, that would be perfectly fine.\nIf a cop lied to another cop and that did hinder an investigation, that would be illegal.\n\nIt doesn't matter who says the lie, what matters is the impact of the lie. It's just that cops aren't typically in the position of lying to hinder a criminal investigation, and civilians often are.",
"Because a police officer is tasked with investigating crimes for the purpose of apprehending criminals and protecting the public. To that end, the law allows them to lie and discourages people from lying to them.",
"An ABC agent once told me if I moved my car for him, I was hammered, I wouldn't get a dui. FUCK THAT.",
"You can lie to cops. People do it all the time. No one gets charged for lying to police. You can get in trouble though for falsely reporting stuff. But if you aren't purposely wasting their time or obstructing their investigations, you can lie away. It isn't a crime to not incriminate yourself or not report a crime."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4huvbx | how does the us president have executive orders when it's not mentioned in the constitution? | Been doing research on executive orders and just read the constitution... it doesn't appear to be in there. I'm frankly confused! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4huvbx/eli5how_does_the_us_president_have_executive/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2shsag",
"d2shz9c",
"d2sih53"
],
"score": [
24,
16,
6
],
"text": [
"The president's job is to execute the laws set by Congress. \"Executive Order\" is just a fancy term for the president formally telling people what to do. They don't give him any power beyond what he wouldn't have otherwise.",
"It's at the very start of Article II, Section 1:\n\n > The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.\n\nThe name that we've given to one of the ways the executive exercises that constitutional power is called executive orders.",
"There is a **lot** of confusion about what an executive order is. It is **not** the president issuing an arbitrary decree. It is when there is a law that says, \"when there is a disaster, the president can deploy the military to assist\", and the president say, \"Hey, its a disaster, I order the military to assist!\" All executive orders come form laws the congress passes, exactly as prescribed by the constitution.\n\nWhere it get contentious is when the president and the congress interpret those laws differently. When they disagree, congress can sue, and the Supreme Court gets to decide."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5h77t8 | why the picture of a rocket launch shows it going away in a curve instead of straight up? | Physics | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5h77t8/eli5_why_the_picture_of_a_rocket_launch_shows_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"daxw7uz",
"daxwljc",
"day1ujp",
"day2ymx",
"day9f9n"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the rocket is supposed to enter orbit. Orbit means that your spacecraft's velocity and the planet's gravity cancel out each other.\n\nIf you're too slow you crash into the planet, if you're too fast you drift into space. The closer you are to the planet the faster you need to be to maintian orbit.",
"The International Space Station is at the altitude of between 350 and 450 kilometers. The International Space Station in order to maintain orbit is moving sideways at approximately 7 kilometers a second. Just going straight up to 350 kilometers elevation will not get you into orbit will just fall right back down.",
"Because it is. If you just wanted to go into space and back, straight up is the fastest route. But rockets typically don't just want to go into space, they want to *stay* there. They want to go into orbit.\n\nAnd in order to do that, you have to go sideways, *really* really fast. (several kilometers per second)\n\nSo as rockets gain height, they turn to go more and more sideways.\n\n\nSo why don't they just launch sideways, you ask? Because they *also* want to get out of the atmosphere, where the air resistance would slow them down. So they launch straight up, to get to where there's less air resistance as fast as possible, and then the gradually turn to go more and more sideways.",
"Contrary to popular belief, it's not that hard to get to really high altitudes and into space. The problem is *staying* there, as you need to accelerate to really high velocities.\n\nRockets go straight up for a bit in order to get out of thicker, denser air at lower altitudes, before nosing over and accelerating to the side in order to get up to the speeds needed to remain in orbit (7+ km/sec, depending on how high you want to go).",
"If they are entering orbit, they need to get up to orbital velocity. So they gain altitude and then gain lateral speed so that when they get up there, they can stay up there"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2cs4iw | why isn't ctrl+shift+p for pasting? | I mean if Ctrl+P is Print, then why not Ctrl+Shift+P For Pasting? Or does V stand for something?
Edit: Thank you! Makes sense , I feel 14% more retarded right now. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cs4iw/eli5_why_isnt_ctrlshiftp_for_pasting/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjifk4f",
"cjifkef",
"cjiflep",
"cjiforx"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"because people don't want broken fingers.\n\nand more seriously: now you can copy (or cut) and paste without using both hands. x, c and v are very close, so it's easy to use and remember set of shourtcuts.",
"It's v simply because of that fact that v is right next to c on the keyboard. And that makes copy pasting a lot easier and faster.",
"If you're using your mouse to highlight or select something it's occupying your right hand. This leaves your left hand for shortcuts.\n\nThe easiest ones are the common ones in a line at the bottom. Ctrl-Z (undo), Ctrl-X (cut), Ctrl-C (copy), and Ctrl-V (paste). Not only is Ctrl-V easy to do, it's also right next to Ctrl-C, which makes sense.\n\nOther easy shortcut keys are Ctrl-A (Select all, good for copying) and Ctrl-S (saving stuff). Ctrl-Q and Ctrl-W are sometimes used for quitting a program.\n\nThis all of course completely ignores things if you're left handed.\n\nTry pressing Ctrl-Shift-P, it's extremely awkward on my keyboard as well (ctrl right below shift).",
"Whilst not the whole/only reason, before word processers if you were proofreading a document and wanted to add some text you would hand write the text either between the lines or in the margins and then indicate exactly where this was to be inserted by a 'v gesture \n\nI.e. *I wanted to add this text in the line below*\n\n\nThis is stuff where ^V but I missed it out\n\nYour typist would then retype it as :-\n\nThis is stuff where I wanted to add this text in the line below but I missed it out\n\n------------------------------\n\nI'm also guessing that 'X' resembled a crossout. With those two in place the new innovation of copy made it convenient to go with the XCV block on the keyboard for those functions \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3n7g6i | what would be the reason for the popularity of youtube compared to other video sharing websites? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3n7g6i/eli5what_would_be_the_reason_for_the_popularity/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvlhs1h"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"The same that brought popularity to facebook, whatsapp and all the web service alike.\n\nThey were the first one in the market with a fairly working platform, so people started using it, and moving a mass of people into different platform is hard. \nLook at google videos, a project trying to compete with youtube. People kept using YT and Google ended up buying the whole Youtube.\n\nSame for whatsapp, facebook chat tried to compete with them and ended up buying them.\n\nFunny story, whatsapp at release time was buggy as hell, but they needed to be the first in the market so they rushed release before competitors. They later fixed all their problem (security was really bad at the early stage) but they secured the masses and they won apparently.\n\nSo in conclusion: having a nice product is important, but being the first one on the market is far more important"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
70y725 | why are so many apps forcing me to use their in-app browser? how do they benefit from that? | Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook Messenger, Twitter, Tumblr, even YouTube have their own browsers that you are forced to use anytime you click a link from within that app. Often times, you have the option from a drop down menu from within their browser to "open in Chrome" (on Android at least), so why not just let me open the link directly into Chrome instead of requiring me to use their slower and inferior browser. Almost every major app is doing this now and they don't give us a way to turn it off. Quite frankly, it's annoying. So why do they do this? There aren't any extra ads that come up in their browser so I don't see how they're making money that way.
I searched for this topic but only one 4 year old thread came up and it didn't have any good answers. If you happen to find a better thread than I did please link me to it, thanks! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/70y725/eli5_why_are_so_many_apps_forcing_me_to_use_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"dn6qgxw",
"dn6zbb8"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"This lets them control their environment. So you made an app that opens in a browser. But every time Safari and Chrome and Opera make a change, patch something, it could totally now not work with your app. Because of their change, you now have to change your app to work with their new browser.\n\nIf it's your browser, you control the changes and you respond to your customers if they are getting an output that isn't working. If chrome isn't working, your customers are boned until you figure out what chrome did, and it's not like you can just call google and work with their developers.",
"They want you to keep interacting with their app. If they switch you to a browser, you're less likely to come back to their app."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1u7i81 | why are most windows (on buildings) rectangular in shape and not circular or triangular? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1u7i81/eli5why_are_most_windows_on_buildings_rectangular/ | {
"a_id": [
"cef9f3v",
"cef9gb1"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Well, from a construction standpoint, it's far easier to build using 90 degree angles. That would apply to the building as well as the window itself. Generally *easier* translates to faster and, (more importantly), cheaper.",
"It's easier to cut glass into squares. It comes out of the furnaces in a large sheet, and is cleanly trimmed along the edges as it mofes down the conveyor belt. from there it is one simple cut to make a square. Also, glass (being crystalline) has fracture lines that run in particular direction, and the squares can take advantage of that."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3t0o5c | how can people with arthritis and who have had bone surgery "feel" and predict weather? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3t0o5c/eli5_how_can_people_with_arthritis_and_who_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx20uah",
"cx20ubh"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Essentially, weather changes are predicted by changes in barometric pressure- low pressure/high pressure systems. Now, there's some evidence we can all feel this to a degree (Ever notice how it \"feels like it's going to storm\"?) but people with damaged joints are going to be more sensitive to it due to the inflammation/scar tissue essentially leaving their bodies less room to \"shift\" with the changes in pressure. ",
"They feel the air pressure changes by the level of pain that they have from their chronic conditions. They learn to interpret these shifts and match them to the corresponding weather changes. It is not 100% accurate by any means, but it is somewhat accurate. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5nsa8k | why we don't create our own energy for free using magnets? youtube video below | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5nsa8k/eli5_why_we_dont_create_our_own_energy_for_free/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcdw8bz",
"dcdwdn2",
"dcdwe0g",
"dcdwe4i",
"dcdwkof",
"dcdwqq3",
"dcdx2vj"
],
"score": [
13,
3,
2,
5,
3,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Videos like this are scams. They either want to sell you something, or more likely, they just hide a battery somewhere in there and get ~19M youtube views with very little effort. \n\nTry to make one yourself and you'll see that they do not work. Conservation of energy is a tough principle to violate.",
"This video, and the thousands that came before it, are fake. This same scam has been around in one form or another for decades. I think it actually predates the internet.\n\nBy the laws of thermodynamics, you can't get energy from nothing. It must be extracted from another source, such as the chemical bonds in oil, the kinetic energy in wind, the gravitational energy inna reservoir of water, or the nuclear energy of the sun. \n\nMagnets do not store their own special energy, thus there isn't anything to extract energy from to power your house. Typically these devices shown off on YouTube have an internal battery, or a hidden power cord pulling power from a wall socket. \n\nI'm happy to elaborate if you want.",
"You don't create energy. You can harness it and change its \"state\". A generator still needs some force to move it. A dam makes a reservoir that has a lot of potential energy from the weight of all the water. As the water flows through a turbine the potential energy becomes the force that spins a generator. A generator is like an electric motor with magnets and coils of wire working in an electromagnetic field. ",
"You can't generate energy from *nothing*.\n\nMagnets don't actually create energy - their motion does, and you can only get them to move by putting energy into the system. When two magnets attract each other, that's just using up the energy that was spent pulling them apart in the first place.",
"Think of it in simple terms, you've got a fan with one blade.\n\nIt begins to spin, because the magnet you are holding repels the magnet on the blade. \n\nWhat happens when it goes around the circle and is now approaching your magnet again? It would push it away, reversing the fan. \n\nThis would oscillate, until your fan blade is eventually at the opposite point, stationary.\n\nAdding more blades does not 'erase' this effect. ",
"That video is a fake. What you are seeing cannot occur with magnets alone due to the way magnets work.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nHere's a whole series from the same guy showing other free energy machines not working:\n\n_URL_1_",
"Magnets always have two poles, [one positive, one negative](_URL_0_). This poles are always equal in strength, and there is *no way to make a magnet that only has one pole.* Cut a magnet in half, and you have two magnets that both have a positive and negative side.\n\nPole positive always attracts poles negative and always repulses other positive poles. If you make a wheel covered in magnets, there will always be a position where the attraction and repulsion equal out.\n\nYou can spin a wheel with rapidly turning on and off electromagnets, but electromagnets need external power and it will always use more power than you extract back from the spinning wheel.\n\n[\"Perpetual motion\" machines always have a hidden power source.](_URL_1_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.greenoptimistic.com/fan-magnet-motors-fake/#.WHkb-PnaeUk",
"https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQ6IOhUBblU2GIBgWOYhrw0TyYGkyEAWE"
],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0c/VFPt_cylindrical_magnet_thumb.svg/220px-VFPt_cylindrical_magnet_thumb.svg.png",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sScrtGdKmho"
]
] |
||
a89k53 | why does blue cheese in a restaurant always taste better then blue cheese in the store? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a89k53/eli5_why_does_blue_cheese_in_a_restaurant_always/ | {
"a_id": [
"ec8wim1",
"ec8ydga"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Different venders and better ingredients. I've been searching for a blue cheese dressing for 10 years, still no luck.",
"Shop cheese is usually sold before it's properly ripe so it gets a better shelf life. Things like Stilton and the soft blue cheeses should not be rock hard in the middle. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1z8oag | if someone removed a significant patch of skin, from dermis to muscle, can a new layer cover it, or how would that heal? | I'm watching season 3 of Dexter, the one with The Skinner, and I was curious as to how the wound would heal if someone completely removed, say, a 6 inch by 6 inch patch of skin from dermal layer to muscle. Would the skin grow to actually cover the now exposed muscle, or would the person just have the muscle exposed from then on? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z8oag/eli5_if_someone_removed_a_significant_patch_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfrinfc",
"cfrj9e2"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"They would need a skin graft to cover the wound. Even if skin could regrow to recover the wound it would take way too long and in the mean time the person would be in a lot of danger of a fatal infection. ",
"Well, I honestly don't know but this raises a better question. What about \"perfect\" conditions? Like a airtight room with germ free zone, sterilized food, and such given time to heal entirely on it's own, would it eventually heal like new?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3m59sx | why some legal documents use caps and what it means. | For example, from [GPLv3](_URL_0_):
> 15 Disclaimer of Warranty.
> THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM “AS IS” WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
I understand the message this gives, what I don't understand is why it is in UPPER CASE. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3m59sx/eli5_why_some_legal_documents_use_caps_and_what/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvc3xhu"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In many places, courts have ruled that certain parts of contracts have to stand out from the rest of the contract. This is especially common with \"disclaimers\" of warranties. \n\nTraditionally, people weren't really even able to waive warranties, and even when they could, it was usually because of lengthy discussions---not just signing a pre-printed form that no one had the authority to change. In response to companies hiding these sorts of waivers in the \"fine print,\" courts basically forced them to make them stand out more if they wanted to hold up in court. Hence the upper case. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html"
] | [
[]
] |
|
1sd53q | how do gas fireplaces work? | Especially with the fake logs in them. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sd53q/how_do_gas_fireplaces_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdwcabv",
"cdwev3c"
],
"score": [
3,
11
],
"text": [
"Most modern day gas fireplaces works much like a gas stove. Thee pilot light on on the time and when you turn the nob on the fireplace, gas is released and feeds the flame. The flame then becomes a full blown fire, emitting light and heat into your room. Note: A pilot light is a small non-fluctuating flame.\nHope this helps :) ",
"They work because gas is flammable. But seriously, what do you mean? "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
390nnc | why are people protesting against the g7 summit, and why arent world leaders discussing their g7 summit issues at the united nations instead of the g7 summit? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/390nnc/eli5why_are_people_protesting_against_the_g7/ | {
"a_id": [
"crzd5dx",
"crzhx45"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
" > Why are people protesting against the G7 Summit\n\nThe G7 is made up of seven of the most economically powerful countries in the world. You can't have an economy that large without stepping on someone's toes, whether its by the (perceived) exploitation of weaker countries to gain cheap labor/resources, generating pollution, or flooding the markets of underdeveloped nations with your own products, which prevents the growth of their domestic industries.\n\n > Why aren't world leaders discussing their G7 summit issues at the United Nations\n\nBecause as countries with highly-developed economies, they have common issues that aren't necessarily shared by the rest of the world.",
"[This site explains it well](_URL_0_)\n\nFrom the perspective of the protesters it boils down to three things.\n\n1) The unnecessary spending, especially security spending at these events tends to be ridiculous, for example see how canada blew 1 billion on a 3 day event, in security costs alone. This level of spending tends to go hand in hand with political corruption. Why not hold the G7/G8/G20 meeting in the middle of nowhere where you will have fewer security issues and fewer distractions.\n\n2) Some feel that it's undemocractic due to issues of transparency when dealing with global affecting policies. It makes sense that world leaders don't want to constantly spill the beans since it may prevent any action from being taken because of pressure from the public and the public often doesn't know what's best when it comes to running a country and managing the global economy. However the lack of transparency leads us to the next point.\n\n3) A lot of them feel that the economic policies that are discussed and implimented at these meetings favour banks and large businesses, or are actively bad for small businesses and individuals. The best way to prop up the economy is to make sure that the banks and big job makers are doing well. However we have seen time and time again that trickle down economics doesn't work in the real world and things like privatization of resources are only a short term economic gain, with decades of overall economic and political loss or setbacks for the state.\n\nThey also feel that the G7 focuses too much effort on issues of global conflicts and security, and the economy, while failing to address issues \"such as education, clean air and water, dignity, fairness, compassion, dialogue, love for neighbours and respect for those who are different\".\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://toronto.mediacoop.ca/blog/moira-peters/3668"
]
] |
||
4ae4io | how are presidential candidates able to request protection by the secret service? do they have to pay? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ae4io/eli5_how_are_presidential_candidates_able_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0zk61t",
"d0zk6nd",
"d0zk72q",
"d0zlw2l"
],
"score": [
6,
7,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"As they are all prospective presidents, they are all entitled to security.\n\nThe secret service is paid by taxes.",
"No, they don't pay. Major presidential candidates get Secret Service protection; this has been standard after the 1968 assassination of candidate Robert F. Kennedy.",
"Think of it like this:\n\nOne of them is the future president of the US\n\nThe secret service is promised to protect the president of the US current and future\n\nI don't think there is a price of protection but that is how I see it.",
"Certain requirements must be met (basically proof they are a contender) and a candidate can request secret service protection. They do not reimburse the government for the costs:\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.shfwire.com/early-candidate-protection-adds-secret-service-burden/"
]
] |
||
9lmqg0 | how can big companies like twitter, snapchat, and spotify have large negative profits for so long without shutting down? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9lmqg0/eli5_how_can_big_companies_like_twitter_snapchat/ | {
"a_id": [
"e77sjlf",
"e77t2mn"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they have plenty of funding from investors that are allowing them to run at a loss, so that they can buy up market share. They're not actually losing money though, as Uber is perhaps the most famous case of. They may be running at an operational loss, and if you look at the total amount of money they've borrowed, it may seem very large, but the rate of growth of the company itself means that its value is much higher than its debt even though it doesn't make a profit.",
"They have money from investors who are basically pumping money into the company, betting that the company will become profitable in the future and their investment will pay off much more than they put in"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
euks2r | why does our voice change when we speak fast and slow | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/euks2r/eli5_why_does_our_voice_change_when_we_speak_fast/ | {
"a_id": [
"ffpyo3e"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I think it comes down to air flow. When we’re running out of air our voices get higher. Think about how when you partially let a balloon go you get that high pitch squeak"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9wo4xr | back in the day, us television used to look awful in the uk due to pal/ntsc conversion. it doesn't any more. what's changed? is the conversion obsolete for digital formats? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9wo4xr/eli5_back_in_the_day_us_television_used_to_look/ | {
"a_id": [
"e9m9gx0",
"e9mi8mp"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"In nearly all cases nowadays the video will be produced in a format much superior to PAL or NTSC and only converted to the target format for broadcast. With older video that was originally stored in NTSC, you can now do fancy digital processing that gives a much better result than the older conversion methods.",
"Older shows were analogue recordings on video machines of their \"native\" system, albeit broadcast-quality. Conversion involved either having to digitise that analogue signal into a (fairly basic by modern standards) computer and re-play it back to analogue at an altered rate, or some very funky analogue wizardry which I wouldn't even like to speculate on. However, the key is at each stage you lose a little bit of quality in conversion (analogue- > digital- > analogue).\n\nThese days everything's digital, so your system can take the pristine original and either throw a few frames away or double a few up (basically) or, more cunningly, calculate some new in-between frames. BUT, as it's all digital and much much higher quality to start with, you don't notice. Also, there's much better signal/image processing software these days, and computers are millions of times more powerful so you can do a lot of clever stuff very cheaply."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3ufbfm | how do watches keep accurate time as their batteries lose power? flashlights dim as their batteries grown old/weak, but watches don't slow down, they just stop ticking one day. | I searched for an explanation on here already, but no luck. Two of my watches had batteries die last week, and both of them kept perfect time until they just stop ticking. Based off the way batteries affect other battery-powered electronics, you'd think they would slowly start ticking slower and slower.
I'm sure there's a complex series of mechanisms which make this possible, but does anyone have a way to explain it like I'm 5? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ufbfm/eli5_how_do_watches_keep_accurate_time_as_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxee58e",
"cxee5sf"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Sure! Battery powered watches use a crystal made out of quarts to keep time. The crystal rings, like a wine glass does when you tap it. Quartz is special because if you give it a little electric jolt, it expands a bit. That makes it start ringing, and also it gives off a little electric spark when it bounces back. So a Quartz watch has an amplifier that keeps it vibrating, like a tuning fork. And it counts out the number of ticks needed to make one second then it moves the hand, or updates the display. When the voltage gets lower, the ringing of the crystal gets quieter, but the same pitch. That's why the don't get slower as the battery gets weaker!",
"The part of the watch that keeps track of time is all or nothing. You run a current through it, and it vibrates at a certain rate. Something else counts this rate and updates your watch display as it counts. Running less current through the crystal doesn't make it vibrate slower, but at some point there just wont be enough power to make it vibrate at all. I think with most watches though they run out of power for the display before they run out of power for the crystal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
nafmu | why are asiatic translations to english often ridiculously incorrect? | Or at least it seems that it's not uncommon for a translation from Chinese, Japanese, or Korean to English to be grammatically incorrect or culturally unacceptable?
[do not come into pig world](_URL_0_)
[garden with curled poo](_URL_2_)
[hot dogs and AIDS](_URL_1_)
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/nafmu/eli5_why_are_asiatic_translations_to_english/ | {
"a_id": [
"c37jvwv",
"c37lhwo",
"c37ml2o",
"c37jvwv",
"c37lhwo",
"c37ml2o"
],
"score": [
18,
8,
2,
18,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"The Asiatic languages have a completely different 'base' to the language than English, they came about and evolved completely separately, so it makes sense that the structure and grammar of those languages are completely different to English. \n\nWith that in mind, a direct translation is basically impossible without it sound outstandingly mangled. The thing is, most of the speakers won't speak English fluently or maybe not even passably, so if they attempt a translation it's not going to be great (and most of the 'Engrish' you see out there is from businesses who can't afford/don't care enough to hire professional translators) so either they'll do a dictionary translation or use google translate/babelfish/whatever. And because they don't speak the language fluently, they won't notice mistakes or inappropriate wording.\n\nYou're probably wondering why they even bother, if they know they can't speak it all that well. Two reasons: one, English is basically the most common language spoken across the world (I believe there are more speakers of Mandarin Chinese, but it's not as *widely* spoken) so it benefits tourism to ensure tourists can read your signs. Better business and all that! Secondly, with the increasing 'westernisation' of the east (the consumer culture and various other aspects) English is kinda really fashionable, which brings me to my final point: *they don't care, it looks cool*. It's basically the same deal as people who get Chinese characters tattooed and have no idea what they translate to. They believe, for one reason or another, it means what they think it means, but it really doesn't.",
"Well, a word in Chinese is made of \"Characters\" which have their own basic meanings as words. Add two characters together for a more complex idea. \n\nExample: to say \"COMPUTER\" in Chinese you would use the characters for \"Electric\" and \"Brain\" together. That's the word \"Computer.\" \n\n\"TELEPHONE?\" Ok, use \"Electric\" \"Word\" and \"Machine.\" OH, but the Chinese people use this so often they frequently leave out a character or two and figure you'll understand from context. \n\nYou can see how things could go very wrong very fast, yes? A well-meaning Chinese guy wants to translate his clever slogan with an online translation program that knows nothing about context and, whammo, you've got a literal translation of chinese characters instead of a translation of meaning.",
"It's a two way road. Think of those tattoos in Asian characters that end up meaning \"crazy diarrhea\" or \"flaccid penis\".",
"The Asiatic languages have a completely different 'base' to the language than English, they came about and evolved completely separately, so it makes sense that the structure and grammar of those languages are completely different to English. \n\nWith that in mind, a direct translation is basically impossible without it sound outstandingly mangled. The thing is, most of the speakers won't speak English fluently or maybe not even passably, so if they attempt a translation it's not going to be great (and most of the 'Engrish' you see out there is from businesses who can't afford/don't care enough to hire professional translators) so either they'll do a dictionary translation or use google translate/babelfish/whatever. And because they don't speak the language fluently, they won't notice mistakes or inappropriate wording.\n\nYou're probably wondering why they even bother, if they know they can't speak it all that well. Two reasons: one, English is basically the most common language spoken across the world (I believe there are more speakers of Mandarin Chinese, but it's not as *widely* spoken) so it benefits tourism to ensure tourists can read your signs. Better business and all that! Secondly, with the increasing 'westernisation' of the east (the consumer culture and various other aspects) English is kinda really fashionable, which brings me to my final point: *they don't care, it looks cool*. It's basically the same deal as people who get Chinese characters tattooed and have no idea what they translate to. They believe, for one reason or another, it means what they think it means, but it really doesn't.",
"Well, a word in Chinese is made of \"Characters\" which have their own basic meanings as words. Add two characters together for a more complex idea. \n\nExample: to say \"COMPUTER\" in Chinese you would use the characters for \"Electric\" and \"Brain\" together. That's the word \"Computer.\" \n\n\"TELEPHONE?\" Ok, use \"Electric\" \"Word\" and \"Machine.\" OH, but the Chinese people use this so often they frequently leave out a character or two and figure you'll understand from context. \n\nYou can see how things could go very wrong very fast, yes? A well-meaning Chinese guy wants to translate his clever slogan with an online translation program that knows nothing about context and, whammo, you've got a literal translation of chinese characters instead of a translation of meaning.",
"It's a two way road. Think of those tattoos in Asian characters that end up meaning \"crazy diarrhea\" or \"flaccid penis\"."
]
} | [] | [
"http://vermont2china.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/dsc08150.jpg",
"http://www.11points.com/images/grossmenu/hotdogs.jpg",
"http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2006/12/26/svSIGNS_wideweb__470x356,0.jpg"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
26unvx | the higgs boson, the higgs field, and how it prove the big bang. | I have the understanding of a 5 year old so please dumb it down a lot. I also don't get the difference between the Higgs-Boson and the Higgs Field, or how their existence proves the Big Bang. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26unvx/eli5_the_higgs_boson_the_higgs_field_and_how_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"chundcl"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"For starters, the Higgs Boson doesn't really \"prove\" the Big Bang. What it does do is give even more evidence that our current understanding of physics, called the Standard Model, is correct. I'll let [Day9](_URL_0_) explain it better(with metaphorical kittens!).\n\nAs for what the Higgs does, it explains how fundamental particles have mass. Basically, everything in the Universe wants to move at ~3x10^8 m/s (speed of light in a vacuum), but objects with mass end up getting slowed down. The Higgs Field explains this. \n\nImagine you're running along the side of a pool, you're free to run as fast as you can. But now imagine if you jump into the pool and try running. The water slows you down and you can run as fast as when you weren't in the pool. This is what the Higgs field does for mass. Particles that have mass \"run through the water\" and are slowed down, while massless particles \"run next to the pool\" and can go at the fastest speed. So it's a particle's interaction with the Higgs Field that gives it its mass. \n\nThe Higgs Boson is basically a by-product of this interaction which was detected by physicists and allowed them to confirm their hypothesis."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSopTMOzVQ8&feature=kp"
]
] |
|
8gdnqa | are router speeds like 1300 mbps utterly useless if you're only getting say 80 down/20 up from the isp? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8gdnqa/eli5_are_router_speeds_like_1300_mbps_utterly/ | {
"a_id": [
"dyatybx",
"dyatz9t"
],
"score": [
10,
6
],
"text": [
"Routers aren't just used for internet data exchange. What if you're transferring files from a local server or from one computer to another?",
"They're still useful for file transfers between computers on the same network - for example, if you use a Plex or other DLNA server to stream to your TV. But it's useless for accessing the internet."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2melwn | is left brain, right brain, and middle brain a myth? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2melwn/eli5_is_left_brain_right_brain_and_middle_brain_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm3gxlh",
"cm3hvdd",
"cm3nmxq"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It is slightly, vaguely trueish, a bit :-) [Decent high-level article here.](_URL_0_)",
"The \"mid brain\" actually refers to a part between what you think of as your brain, and your brain stem. It for sure has its own special functions.\n\nThe left and right side of the brain are slightly different, but not nearly as much as popular opinion would make you believe. In fact, in a treatment used to help people suffering from severe seizures, they severed the corpus callosum, the part of the brain that communicates between the two sides. The side effects weren't very pronounced at all unless they specifically looked for oddities. So while each side does have it's own functions, there is a lot of overlap.",
"Not necessarily a myth, but the differences are less exaggerated than people think. Each lobe can compensate for damage or dysfunction in the other, so it's definitely not a concrete separation of function."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-myths/201206/why-the-left-brain-right-brain-myth-will-probably-never-die"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
2yyaqp | why does the government ban website such as the pirate bay and authorize isis propaganda websites online ? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2yyaqp/eli5why_does_the_government_ban_website_such_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpe2m03"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Websites such as Pirate Bay are so called \"illegal websites\" which are notorious for hosting torrents that share illegal copies of products. These websites break copyright laws in your government and so they are banned. Now ISIS propaganda isn't illegal now is it? It may be against everyone's moral compasses but it would be unlawful to block it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5vqm8a | how do they synchronize the sound so perfectly with images in complex musical movie scenes such as the last 11 minutes of whiplash ? | I mean, they must've shot so many takes of that scene, probably on several days, but after the final montage, the sound, the music, the images, all fit together near perfection.
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vqm8a/eli5_how_do_they_synchronize_the_sound_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"de40dag",
"de40q4l",
"de4i5ph"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"It is possible to play back the video and music at different times to try to match them up. And you pick your cuts for the same effect. You can also subtly change the playback speed of the video to further make it match up to the music. And as you mentioned they have multiple takes and can take the take that best fits the rhythm of the music. They often play the music on the set to help the actors with the rhythm.",
"It depends on the type of music and the level of synchronization needed. I assume you are talking about very accurate synchronization and not just background music that doesn't need to be aligned with specific events on screen.\n\nIf the music is electronic, it's just a matter of aligning the music track with the video track. Electronic music can be altered or tailored to fit the visuals exactly.\n\nIf the music requires live players and a conductor as in orchestral music, one technique is to screen the visuals to the conductor via a screen located behind the orchestra. This allows the conductor to react in real time to the visuals (and the players to the conductor).\n\nOne of the hardest synchronizations is actually found mostly in cartoons, where the orchestra is tasked with sound effects or otherwise with direct reaction to what's on screen. Ever seen the Loony Toons \"musicals\" like \"Kill the Wabbit\"? The instruments need to react to the footsteps of the character, for example. Or \"Bugs Bunny Opera\" where the orchestra and conductor actually need to react to a mirror image of themselves. This kind of synchronization needs to be very precise because orchestral sound does not tolerate too much post manipulation.",
"I don't know the movie you're talking about, and so I don't know how old or new it might be. \n\nBut I am a musician who plays on the soundtracks for many video games and movie scores and can speak about the way it's done now. \n\nIn scenes where the music is just \"background\" and doesn't have to match up with specific events you can be a bit more lax about the process, but if you need the music to match up exactly here's how they do it: \n\nComposer gets a final copy of the video. It's all timed and cut the exact way it'll appear in the film. \n\nThe composer will make a note of important actions in the film and exactly how far apart they are (e.g.: the two swords hit each other at 1:42.556 and 1:45.637). \n\nThen they will come up with a musical idea or melody that would fit the action and they'll do some math to find out exactly how fast the music needs to be so that the two big orchestra hits happen exactly at those times. \n\nA lot of times this means that the music will be at an oddly specific tempo, like MM 135.8. \n\nThen they write the music at that tempo so the two big chords happen exactly in line with the film. \n\nNext they go into recording with the orchestra. The orchestra all have headsets on with a \"click track\" going. The click track is programmed to click at exactly 135.8 beats per minute so it will be the exact tempo needed to fit the action on screen. \n\nThen they record the piece and it's perfectly synced with the action due to the musicians all hearing the click in their ears and playing at the right tempo to match what's happening on screen. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6pcsez | why does our skin not rot until we die? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6pcsez/eli5_why_does_our_skin_not_rot_until_we_die/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkobpfc"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Our skin is constantly growing and the outermost layer is constantly sloughing off. The skin you have now is not the skin you had a year ago. Plus, just under your epidermis you have blood flowing, and an army of cells designed to fend off the bacteria and whatnot that would cause it to rot."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
61qa3v | why do wood fires burn so slowly, but house fires with even greater area to cover seem to be rather quick? | Whenever I'm camping and light a fire, it generally takes a hours until the wood burns completely through, but whenever I hear about a house fire on the news, it seems like houses can almost completely burn down before the FD even gets there. Why is it that the wooden structure of a house burns so quick when camp fires don't? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/61qa3v/eli5_why_do_wood_fires_burn_so_slowly_but_house/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfgghsr",
"dfgixp6",
"dfgkhr7",
"dfgml0a",
"dfgmn8j",
"dfgnwze",
"dfgs76h",
"dfgsstg",
"dfhcxb4"
],
"score": [
214,
3,
27,
3,
9,
8,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The wooden structure itself actually doesn't burn that fast, and if you look at the remains of a structure fire, you'll notice that a lot of the wood is mostly in tact. The fire just weakens it enough for it to collapse, if it does at all. It's the furniture, carpets, etc. that burn so fast. Especially curtains. Curtains are a HUGE fire hazard.",
"I think the real answer is that you are comparing the acceleration of a fire to complete consumption. If a house fire was to lead to the complete consumption of the available fuel it would take a very long time. ",
"In addition to the other comments, the structure of a standard campfire (3-4 logs making a triangle into each other) contributes to it. \n\nIn this campfire, the logs burn, some of the heat radiates into the other logs, but most of it rises, away from the campfire, and into the air. This heat is lost, and it flies away. The flames on the log crawl up the log at about a 45 degree angle, where they contact a small amount of neighboring wood, and a lot of air. You may notice that as the logs ember, they drop coals in a pile under the logs. These embers sustain the fire by radiating the heat upward (into the logs) and empowering the flames on the underside of the logs.\n\nIn a housefire, the fire doesn't radiate the heat away. (until you breach a wall, or ceiling) The heat radiates into nearby furniture, walls, whatever, retaining that heat. This spreads the fire much faster by having everything heat up. For flames on a vertical wall, the actual flame is in contact with the wood directly above it, far more than a log at 45 degrees, which accelerates the burning of that piece of wood. In a housefire, there is also a much greater quantity of fuel. As the wood starts embering, there is simply so much more fuel to burn. The embers land, spread their heat to their surroundings and then those surroundings burn and ember and so forth. The fact that a house is a box-like structure means that it contains the heat and accumulates it, like an oven, whereas an open campfire is always losing heat to the air and wind.\n\nTL:DR - fire burning things is a reaction that is controlled by the amount of heat being retained, the amount of fuel in contact with flame. Houses on fire hold the heat, spread it more effectively, and are simply larger. ",
"Its about surface area as much as anything else. Yes there may differences in flammability but surface area is much more important. The greater the surface area the greater the exposure to oxygen. ",
"I'm a person responsible for fire testing of architectural products and here is my take on it.\n\nA commercial or residential window shade will burn if in the path of a flame, otherwise it self extinguishes. Similarly the walls and furniture will burn if in contact with a flame from a source like a carpet or other flooring surface. Ceiling tiles will burn if in path of a flame off of desks and sofas. The intensity of the fire will determine the flame height and the materials in the room affected by the flame. \n\nThe reason the campfire takes so long is because the logs were not stacked in order to enable the lower burning logs to ignite those above them. Next time try slicing the log with slits in it and see how much faster it burns. It has to do with accessibility to air. A solid log burns slowly while the slit logs burns faster because the air reaches inside the slits. Any burnable surface in contact with both air and a flame will burn quickly. ",
"I work wit a volunteer fire fighter. We were talking about the speed difference in modern and old houses.\n\nModern houses are filled with plastic and synthetic material so burn damn fast!\n\nOld wooden houses are much slower.",
"I would assume the reason why houses burn so quickly isn't because of the wood but because of the synthetic materials inside houses.",
"Follow up question on this, why does wood seem to be such a common building material in the United States? Is it just cost? I feel like brick buildings (fully brick as opposed to just a facade on a timber frame) should be more disaster proof against things like forest fires and hurricanes, but I'm not sure if that's actually true.\n\nAlso, how well insulated are wooden homes? The US seems to have much greater extremes of temperature than Europe as well, so it seems like you guys have to have your A/C or your heating on a lot. Lots of homes in europe have cavity wall insulation where the exterior of the house is a brick wall, then a layer of insulation, then another brick wall to keep heat out/in. Does wood work better or worse than this?",
"Surface area versus volume. The larger the volume of material receiving the full fire triangle (fuel, oxygen, and heat) the faster more energetic the flame.\n\nThe total ability of \"the fire\" to radiate heat is limited by its surface area.\n\nThe total ability of \"the fire\" to receive new oxygen is also limited by its surface area -- unless you add an oxidizer or a blower or something.\n\nVolume goes with the cube, area goes with the square, so larger things get bigger in volume faster than they get larger in size. You know this from blowing up balloons. \n\nSo a larger fire will \"burn hotter\" because it cannot get rid of the heat it's generating \"as easily\" as a smaller fire.\n\nSo you make a tiny campfire and you can get right up next to it, and it will burn and smolder all night. Make a larger campfire and you can't get close enough to it to be comfortable -- you just have this point where one side of you is searing and one side of you is freezing.\n\nBuild a bonfire and you can get injured long before you are close enough to enjoy it.\n\nSet a house ablaze and you need protective gear to get on the front lawn.\n\nNow a house fire will often leave a skeleton of wood behind because the fire triangle says you need oxygen and the oxygen cannot penetrate the wood fast enough to burn it. So the wood chunks _bake_ and become charcoal instead of burning. The rest of the house burns real fast, then stops burning for running out of fuel. The whole thing then cools and there's not enough heat to keep the structural members burning. Plus there's often a guy with a hose cooling the thing and blocking the oxygen (both are part of what water does to fire).\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1b2rf8 | apparently a monkey on a typewriter with an infinite amount of time would write the complete works of shakespeare, this makes sense to me. but people studying probabilities have said it's by no means certain it would, even with an infinite amount of time. why not? | I liked the idea of infinity giving the monkey time to write anything and everything, I can't get my head around the monkey *not* writing all of Shakespeare. :/ | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1b2rf8/eli5_apparently_a_monkey_on_a_typewriter_with_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"c931xgu",
"c933j5f",
"c933wdq",
"c934h0n",
"c934j47",
"c935nwr",
"c936ok9",
"c938eaw",
"c93a8t7",
"c93aa2j"
],
"score": [
18,
2,
34,
11,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I've taken a few prob and stats classes as part of my cognitive science degree, so I may not do this as well as someone who's studied the subject in more depth, but I'll take a stab at it.\n\nThe saying that a monkey on a typewriter with infinite time to write (assuming it is interrupted by nothing and does nothing else for all of that time, of course) likely comes from the fact that given the time limit of infinity, all possible combinations of the units in question have a non-zero chance of appearing. It would essentially be the chance of the monkey typing the characters of the play in sequence at random, which is a tiny chance.\n\nHowever, the fact that something has a non-zero probability does not mean that it ever has to actually happen. A lot of people (especially when gambling) think that eventually, their number is going to come up. In most cases, all trials in probability happen independently so whatever happened on the last roll (or coin toss) has no effect on the chances of the next one. In theory, coin tosses have a 50% chance of getting heads, but if you flip tails the first time, heads is no more likely to come up on the next flip than it would be on any other flip.",
"Because they fundamentally don't understand the nature of the statement. I'm not trying to be disparaging, it's my genuine opinion.\n\nOh, and a scientific study actually got funded to prove the lack of Shakespeare. \n\n“They get bored and they shit on the keyboard rather than type\" is probably my favorite line from the study.\n\n_URL_0_",
"There are a lot of very misleading answers here. There is one fact to know: All random sequences are normal (which will imply all finite sequences occur infinitely often). So if by a monkey banging on a keyboard you mean to imply that the output is random, then there is no doubt that not only will the monkey eventually type out all the works of Shakespeare (in order, no less) but the monkey will do it infinitely many times. \n\nHowever, if by using a monkey you mean to say that the typing is not random but is \"monkey like\" then the question is impossible to decide as \"monkey like\" typing in not determined to a satisfactory point to give an answer. (for instance, \"monkey like\" typing might favor certain letters or letter combinations)\n\nSo as long as the sequence of events is random, then every (finite) possibility will occur infinitely many times. That includes a random roulette wheel, not matter how many times you get red in a row... eventually there will be a time when you get a googlex consecutive blacks... and that will happen infinitely many times... no matter how many reds you get to start with (as long as it is truly random).",
" > I liked the idea of infinity giving the monkey time to write anything and everything, I can't get my head around the monkey not writing all of Shakespeare.\n\nThe misconception here is that just because the monkey can write anything, doesn't mean the monkey has to write everything. It could, for example, choose to write the same character over and over again, even given a huge amount of time. It's so unlikely that we give it a probability of 0, but it's not impossible.\n\nTo see why, let's simplify the problem. A monkey has a typewriter with two symbols, a and b. It types randomly between the two options. What's the chance that it never types a b?\n\nStart by looking at a length 1 sequence: There's two possibilities, 'a' and 'b'. So here the monkey has a 50% chance of writing a sequence with no b.\n\nFor length 2 sequences, there's now 4 possible sequences and only one of them('aa') has no b in it. So the monkey has a 25% chance of not writing a b.\n\nFor a length n sequence, there's 2^n possible sequences and only one of them is without b ('aaa...aa'). So there's a 1/(2^n) chance of the monkey typing a sequence with no b.\n\nWhat we mean when we say the monkey has an infinite amount of time is simply looking at the trend here: as the sequence gets longer, the chance of typing without a b is getting lower and lower, and it's trending towards 0. That's why we say there's a 0% chance the monkey typing without any b when given an infinite amount of time. However, there is still a chance that the monkey will type the sequence 'aaaaaa....' and repeat forever without a b. It's infinitely unlikely, but not impossible, if that makes sense.\n\nTo apply this to the question, the numbers get more difficult but the same principle applies. Look at a randomly typing monkey given a full keyboard and then look at the chance it never writes a 't'. Sequences without 't' can't have the works of shakespeare in them, and it's possible that they will happen, although again infinitely unlikely.\n\nEven harder again is to find the probability of the monkey not writing shakespeare directly. Clearly, it must be higher than the probability of writing a sequence with no 't', so it's ≥0% chance, and is at least possible. It turns out that it is also a 0% chance, but again is possible.",
"Let's simplify the problem. Suppose instead of a typing monkey, we have a monkey flipping a fair coin. Fair means that the coin has a probability of .5 landing heads and a probability of .5 landing tails every time it's thrown.\n\nAnd instead of Shakespeare, the goal of the monkey is to get one heads. Just one measly time, the coin needs to land heads. \n\nWell we can ask, what's the probability of this?\n\nIt turns out the question is easily calculated if we calculate the probability that the monkey fails instead, and then subtract the result from 1. That's a rule of probability. The probability of succeeding plus the probability of failing has to be 1.\n\nThe way we calculate probabilities about infinity is with a concept called a limit. The idea is that we pretend we're doing something a finite amount of times, and see what happens as that amount gets really really big. So let's start!\n\nSuppose we have one coin flip. What's the probability that the monkey doesn't get heads? Well, it's got to be tails. That has probability 1/2. So the probability the monkey will get heads is 1 - 1/2. Awesome!\n\nNow, let's do two. To fail at getting heads, both of the coins have to be tails. The probability that the first is tails is 1/2 and same with the second. When we have two probabilities and we want to \"and\" them, and they can't affect each other in any way, we multiply the probabilities. So the probability that we fail at getting a heads is 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4. And the probability that we succeed is 1 - 1/4.\n\nYou should now notice a pattern that you can apply to any number. What happens with 1 million coin flips? Well to fail, they all have to be tails. The probability is 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 * ... * 1/2 (one million times), also written as 1/2^(1000000) and the probability we succeed is 1 - 1/2^(1000000)\n\nSo we can see that as the number gets bigger and bigger, the answer is getting closer and closer to 1. So we say that in the infinite case, the probability that we will eventually get a heads is 1.\n\nNow in the Shakespeare case, the probability of failure for every attempt (we can say an attempt is writing the number of letters in Shakespeare's works and we succeed if they match or start over otherwise) is really high. Probably like point nine nine nine nine nine nine nine GASP nine nine nine nine nine nine nine nine lots and lots of nines. But when we multiply that number by itself, it's going to get smaller by a little bit. And when we do it again, it's going to get smaller again. And it's going to keep getting smaller and smaller until it gets to 0. So in the Shakespeare case, the probability of success eventually is also 1.\n\nBack to the coin example. We know that with probability 1, the monkey will get a head. This means the sequence tails, tails, tails, tails, tails, etc (forever) has probability zero. But wait, that's still a sequence? What if the monkey gets that sequence?\n\nWell it turns out, not only does that sequence have probability 0 of happening, ANY sequence has probability zero of happening. How do we know? Well the first flip has probability 1/2 of happening. The first two together have probability 1/4. The first million have probability 1/2^1000000 . In the limit, the probability is 0. Some sequence has to happen, and yet, all the sequences have probability zero!\n\nIf that sounds weird, it is! It turns out that when dealing with infinity, probability zero events CAN happen. In math, the term we use for events with probability zero is that they happen \"almost never\". And the term for events with probability one is that they happen \"almost surely\". Here's a link: _URL_0_\n\nSo the answer is that a monkey writing for an infinite amount of time will write the complete works of Shakespeare with probability 1, and it will fail to write the complete works of Shakespeare with probability 0. But because of how infinity is weird, that doesn't mean that every infinite sequence of characters will have the complete works of Shakespeare somewhere, so the monkey could still pick one of those sequences.",
"You could say one monkey already did.",
"Doesn't the probability of failure depend on there only being 1 monkey? \n \nIf we use the typical scenario of an *infinite* number of monkeys given an infinite time to type, doesn't the probability issue that OP asked about disappear?",
"Because the monkey would likely ruin the key mechanism by clogging it with shit, thereby rendering the typewriter useless.",
"What's more interesting is that it would produce new works possibly better than Shakespeare.",
"The monkey does not HAVE to write Shakespeare. \n\nI will prove this by reducing a monkey's random typing to something simpler: **An infinite series of random characters, possibly including anything required in a Shakespearan play.** Furthermore, I will reduce *the works of Shakespeare* down to this: **A finite string of characters** that you're looking for within the above infinite set of characters.\n\nSo our simpler scenario is this:\nIn a series of infinite characters, do all possible finite set of characters HAVE to appear? \n\nLet us allow a certain assumption:\nThe monkey will never fall into a loop and infinitely repeat the same finite set of characters\n\nSo if I can construct a series of infinite characters where there is no loop, and I can somehow show that it will not contain every imaginable finite set of characters, then I will have proven that it is POSSIBLE for the Monkey not to write the works of Shakespeare.\n\n\nHere's your counter example:\nThe monkey types 'A', then 'B', then 'AA', then B', then 'AAA', then 'B', and continues like this for infinity. \n\nAs you can see, I've constructed an example where I have an infinite non-repeating set of characters that manages to evade any annoying Shakespearean language. I hope my reduction of this problem down to its roots has not clouded the validity of the argument. As long as a monkey CAN type infinitely without writing Shakespeare, you can not assert that a monkey WILL write Shakespeare. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.arn.org/docs2/news/monkeysandtypewriters051103.htm"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almost_surely"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
43co8f | how does an object in orbit not gain speed? | The way they explain orbit is that an object falls towards earth but misses because of it's horizontal velocity. If it falls shouldn't its speed increase by 10m/s^2? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43co8f/eli5_how_does_an_object_in_orbit_not_gain_speed/ | {
"a_id": [
"czh9t2f"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Objects orbiting are always accelerating inward, but momentum keeps going around. Orbiting objects however gain speed when closer to the object they're orbiting (comets go fast around the sun but slower the further away they are)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3baozl | why are there so much world war 2 movies and games that focus on the allied campaign in western europe and not other places like africa and the soviet union? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3baozl/eli5_why_are_there_so_much_world_war_2_movies_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cskewyj",
"cskggkd",
"csklnwi"
],
"score": [
31,
4,
4
],
"text": [
"Most video games are made in the USA, so the WWII games tend to focus on places where the largest numbers of Americans fought in WWII.",
"In Australia we often have movies/documentaries about the Japanese/South East Asian aspects of WW2, because that's the part of the war (that and the Allied campaign in Europe) that our ancestors were most involved in. But as u/Concise_Pirate says, it's all about the target audience.\nIf you speak to people living in South Africa or Eastern Europe, they may tell you that they know more/see more/experience more media about the war as it was fought in their area.",
"Off the top of my head, famous games and movies that don't focus on the western front:\n\n1) The Pacific - HBO miniseries (American pacific campaign)\n\n2) Red Orchestra - series of video games taking place in eastern front Europe and the Pacific campaign, playable from American, Russian, Japanese, or German sides\n\n3) Like someone else said, the first two COD games had campaigns from the perspective of Russia\n\n4) Battlefield 1942, the first Battlefield game, had African campaigns.\n\nAnd if you go back to old movies, there are dozens and dozens of films told from every perspective because back in the day all they did was make movies about war."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2q4k38 | why are juggalos universally disliked? | As a European dude I'm pretty sure I've never seen a Juggalo in person. What about them makes people explode with hatred, while other groups that often look silly and listen to specific music don't seem to have that effect? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2q4k38/eli5_why_are_juggalos_universally_disliked/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn2sg98",
"cn2soss",
"cn2t2an",
"cn2tpr0",
"cn2x2uv"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
13,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Juggalos are hiphop-heads that dress up like clowns. The stereotypical Juggalo is very in your face and obnoxious.\n\nIt's pretty much a rap fad for white trash.",
"Check out the show Workaholics S01E07: Straight Up Juggahos. It sums it up nicely.",
"I can't speak for anyone else but for me it's because they embrace stupidity and ignorance then preach it through the medium of shitty music.\n\nA bit like a Mormon playing with with a broken guitar.",
"Trashy dope heads with a willing participation of hive mind and willful ignorance.",
"Because they all look like they went cunt up in a black and white paint bucket and pose like attention seeking wankers. Their music sucks, too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
yvk9v | what affect does the president really have on jobs? | I've heard extremes on this idea.
One thing I've heard is that it's ridiculous to think the president has an affect on jobs as though he's some kind of job deity or something.
The other side seems to think he's solely responsible.
(Not that it's truly polarized like that, but I exaggerate how split it is to make my point)
Anyway, I assume that it's probably in the middle somewhere and that the president can either overspend and make things hard on us by causing a drop in jobs; Or he can create temporary jobs, etc.
Anyway, what say you? How does the president affect jobs? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/yvk9v/what_affect_does_the_president_really_have_on_jobs/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5z74y6"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Basically the president can implement laws passed by congress and that's it. That's still a lot of power, but within a limited context. Without Congress he can't create new law, can't spend, can't tax, he can only create the details of how laws are applied.\n\nThe biggest way government \"creates\" jobs is by spending (therefore hiring people) or tax incentives. In his first two years he did both, the 700 billion dollar stimulus was 400 billion dollars of tax cuts, 150 billion given directly to states to prevent mass firings, and 150 billion in spending. The problem is it was too small. The economy contracted by trillions, not hundreds of billions. It was enough to help, but not enough to make things normal. But the last two years he has been unable to get congress to pass just about anything, he has even been unable to pass some tax cuts because the House refuses to schedule a vote for almost anything. Without Congress the president has very little real power."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4abjmw | why do children seemingly enjoy being tickled but grow to hate it as adults? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4abjmw/eli5_why_do_children_seemingly_enjoy_being/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0yzz1d",
"d0z53pw",
"d0z5sur"
],
"score": [
4,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"Tickling is a tool that animals use to learn fighting skills with play without actually harming each other. Fighting off a tickle attack is similar to fighting off a real attack. But with tickling nobody gets hurt. After you reach adulthood those skills have been developed and it feels more like a real attack and so is unwelcome. ",
"Plenty of adults like being tickled and plenty of kids hate being tickled. People often laugh involuntarily when they're tickled; this is a defense mechanism to signify submissiveness. People will often panic quite a bit because they don't like feeling vulnerable; this is because being tickled activates the part of your brain responsible for fight or flight. I remember being tickled by an older friend when I was little and I was laughing but telling her to stop. Likewise, in an episode of Family Guy, Lois laughs when Peter tickles her but then breaks his nose with a frying pan to get him to stop. \n\nA child may like it because they're more carefree and it's more of a playful thing to them. Remember, even if the kid is laughing, it doesn't mean they're okay with being tickled. An adult may feel helpless or vulnerable and may not like experiencing those feelings, but most often, they hate it because they were tickled a lot as kids. \n\nIf you're a kid who loves being tickled then you'll probably grow up to be an adult who loves being tickled by his/her SO. Likewise, if you hate it, you'll probably hate it when you're older.",
"The laughter is a panic response, but most kids (shouldn't) have much experience with panic, thus people trying to instinctively move away even when they're _URL_0_'s basically the same nervous laughter you make when you're uncomfortable.adults have more experience with panic and anxiety, and are able to identify the feeling"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"laughing.it"
]
] |
||
29vujc | why is it that when i was younger, i would bruise so easily and now, i never bruise at all no matter how bad the injury? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29vujc/eli5_why_is_it_that_when_i_was_younger_i_would/ | {
"a_id": [
"cipd76y"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When I first met my wife she would bruise at a touch, and was always covered in bruises. I had good reason to try to help, as many people seemed to think I was beating up my GF. It turned out she was mildly but chronically anaemic. Cooking in cast-iron cookware fixed the problem."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
986mcg | how are swords forged? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/986mcg/eli5_how_are_swords_forged/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4do90z",
"e4dohzp",
"e4dp99f"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You take a chunk of metal, heat it up, and beat it with a hammer until it's nice and flat. Than you cool it, and sharpen it in a sharpening wheel.",
"Metal is super heated --- > molded into a certain shape --- > super heated again and hammered to create shaft and further form the blade--- > dunked in oil... repeat last two steps until it looks how it should. --- > sharpen using a whet stone and make it nice and sharp. --- > make a handle so you don't only hold a small metal rectangular prism. --- > make a sheath so you don't hurt your self---- > kill your mentor and take over the 9th infantry battalion.",
"Watch “forged in fire” \n\nIts a blacksmith competition show that highlights major points of the processes and what could go wrong"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5rc3nn | companies like flipkart and amazon have been running in thousands of crores of losses for almost 5 to 7 years. how is they still running? when will they become profitable? | Me and my roommate had one hour debate on this at 5 in the morning.
EDIT : CRORES = 10 MILLION | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5rc3nn/eli5_companies_like_flipkart_and_amazon_have_been/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd62dem",
"dd62kpz",
"dd6jy2c"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"\nAmazon runs on a very, very razor-thin profit margin. However, they sell so many items, added with their near-monopoly due to low prices and convenience, makes them actually extremely profitable. They can survive mishaps on individual items due to this as well. They don't lose much profit at all on the small percentage of mishaps that DO happen. ",
"Amazon is venture capital looking for a profitable venture.\n\nSelling books was never going to be profitable but it was an online platform that wasn't being exploited by anybody else so that was Jeff's foot in the door.\n\nThen they did the eBay look-alike, then they did Fire Phones, etc, etc. They're just looking for a niche to exploit.\n\nThey do have a lot of leverage: Even when they aren't profiting they *are* running a very high volume business and that's nothing to sneeze at.\n\nIf Jeff was your unemployed buddy living in his mother's basement and he asked you for a million dollars for some scheme he came up with to compete against Apple with his \"Fire Phone\" you'd be like, \"No.\"\n\nBut Jeff is not that guy and he's running a very large business and when he asks investors for cash to roll out a new product they pony up (even after the Fire Phone was a total flop.) That's power.",
"High revenue growth rates, reinvesting all/most profits in the company on infrastructure or innovation, business diversification, cheap loans.\n\nELI5: Your next door neighbor Jimmy opens the first lemonade stand in the neighborhood. The neighborhood is new and lots of houses are being built every month. Jimmy charges 50 cents per cup of lemonade, only makes 3 cents per cup that he sells. Jimmy is very nice to his neighbors and does everything he can to keep them happy so they'll come back. Jimmy sells 1,000 cups the first week, making $30. Instead of buying a toy for himself, he buys a blender so that he can make smoothies. The next week, he sells 1,400 cups of lemonade at 48 cents each (price matching little Wally down the street) and 300 smoothies for $1 each (15 cents profit). With his $59 profit + $10 loan from his parents, he buys another table, blender and equipment to make lemonade and smoothies (labeled \"Jimmy's Famous Lemonade\") and let's his friend JR rent the table/equipment for 15% of his sales. Week after week, this continues and Jimmy opens more lemonade stands in the fastest growing neighborhoods and uses all his profits + more loans from his parents to buy tables, blenders and ingredients. Jimmy's parents know that he sells thousands of smoothies and cups of lemonade every day at this point and can pay back the money, so don't worry about the loan very much as the lemonade business is growing and Jimmy has shown that he can continue to grow the business for a long time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a4juxy | how does every involuntary movement in our body keeps happening? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a4juxy/eli5_how_does_every_involuntary_movement_in_our/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebf40h0",
"ebf4bpl",
"ebf4d00"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You’re a potato clock but instead of telling time, you breathe and blink and your heart beats. ",
"Blinking, while it can be done voluntarely, is mostly a reflex handled by your brainstem, you have nerves going from nucleus in the brainstem that control the blink (I think it's the 5th cranial nerve and maybe the 7th, ot sure about the 7th) \n\nFor your heart, it's different. While you still have nerves from your brainstem controlling your heart rythm, you don't need those nerves for it to work.\n\nYour heart is an autonomous organ, as long as it has oxygen and glucose, it will beat. Some cells in your heart can excitate themselves alone and generate an \"electric current\" that will make your heart contract.\n\nPeople who get heart transplants don't have the brainstem nerves reconnnected to their new heart.\n\nPeople with normal heart have a rate around 70 beat per minute, and it's around 100-110 when you're doing a physical effort.\n\nPeople with transplanted heart have a normal rate of 100 beat per minute, and it's around 120 when they do a physical effort.\n\nNB : Not having the nerves isn't that big of a deal, it doesn't impact the heart function, just makes it beat faster. Plus you still have your endocrinous system that release adrenaline/noradrenaline in the blood stream when you do a physical activity, so you can still adapt do physical activity just fine, your heart will still adapt",
"We have an area in the brain that keep the most basic things going. Breathing, heartbeat, blinking, sleeping, eating etc. If it were not the case we would have to think about those things all the time and make sure we breathe right and our heart beats according to the situation and I guess some people would forget to breathe, their heart would stop beating, sleep would be impossible etc. It would overwhelm us to the point that we couldn't think about anything else but that."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
24zmii | did regular people from the 1930s/1940s speak the same way as hollywood actors from that time? why do old hollywood actors speak so peculiarly? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/24zmii/eli5_did_regular_people_from_the_1930s1940s_speak/ | {
"a_id": [
"chc8jjx"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It's called the \"transatlantic accent\" and it was spoken by \"classy\" Americans until the mid-20th century. It's a totally manufactured accent made to sound like a cross between British and American English so that no one can determine exactly where you are from.\n\nSo no, most regular people in the 30s and 40s did not speak like Katherine Hepburn."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9p4c4p | how did colorism begin? why is it still a thing? | India, America, Africa, it's everywhere. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9p4c4p/eli5_how_did_colorism_begin_why_is_it_still_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"e7yzkrs"
],
"score": [
19
],
"text": [
"It's also classist. In ye olden times the nobility were lighter skinned because they didn't have to toil out in the sun and get tan. The peasants did and were therefore less."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5vsx78 | why does some greenhouse gases absorb more radiation than others? | And how does it connect to Global Warming Potential? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vsx78/eli5_why_does_some_greenhouse_gases_absorb_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"de4m5e8",
"de4q7uw"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Greenhouse gases don't exactly absorb the radiation purse, they just block it from leaving the atmosphere. \nThink of the Earth like a bed and the greenhouse gases are blankets, all you do is keep in heat so if you add more blankets you keep in more heat.",
"Heat is in the infrared frequency range, which is also close to the resonance frequency of CO2. What this means is that when heat hits a CO2 molecule it causes it to vibrate at the frequency of heat. That vibration causes the CO2 molecule to emit heat energy in all directions, some back towards the earth. Everything has a resonance frequency at which it naturally vibrates. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
5yrc86 | blue light and eye strain? | I've seen computers and phones having something called "eye comfort mode" that removes blue light in order to strain eyes less.
Why is it that blue light strains eyes more than the other colours? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yrc86/eli5_blue_light_and_eye_strain/ | {
"a_id": [
"descbng"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It is not that it strains the eye.\n\nThe issue is it makes it more difficult for you to fall asleep. When your brain gets the blue light it is one of the things that tells the brain it is daytime and you should be awake. Removing the blue light (supposedly) allows your brain to tell you that you are tired and should go to bed sooner than it otherwise would allowing you to get a full night's sleep.\n\nThat's the theory anyway. Not sure if there is science that shows this has a measurable effect.\n\nEDIT: A word."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1r81lw | why do dogs bark when they sense an earthquake coming. | URL or Text Here | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1r81lw/eli5_why_do_dogs_bark_when_they_sense_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdkino1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"My cat went crazy either immediately before the earthquake started here in the Washington DC area about 18 months ago -- or else it knew what was going on a good 10 seconds or more before I did.\n\nThat's the thing -- it's not always possibly to know (as a human) that an earthquake is happening instantly.\n\nAnd my rational brain thought it was a large truck driving down the alley, for at least a few seconds. Meanwhile the cat's freaking out, but I'm just thinking that it's still just a huge truck."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
9r90oy | how do cars in the usa accept petrol which is a lower octane level than 95? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9r90oy/eli5_how_do_cars_in_the_usa_accept_petrol_which/ | {
"a_id": [
"e8f1pj3",
"e8f3ara",
"e8f439u"
],
"score": [
22,
3,
6
],
"text": [
"It's two different measurements. \n\nIn Europe they use a measurement called \"Research Octane Number\", or RON. In the USA they use a measurement called \"Anti-Knock Index\", or AKI, which is the average between RON and another measurement called \"Motor Octane Number\" (MON). MON is usually about 8-12 lower than RON, which makes AKI about 4-6 lower than RON.\n\nAdditionally, in higher elevation areas you can use a lower octane because the engine draws in less air.",
"What would be a 95 in the US? ",
"Engine performance is TUNED according to the market that is sold in. Your car's ECU (Engine Control Unit) manages your vehicle's performance according to a fuel map. If you had to take your car over to the US and put in regular gas you are likely to noticed decreased performance as well as higher fuel usage because your car's ECU will be set for a higher octane number. However when filling with premium your car should run as normal. But yes it should be noted that because of the method of Octane rating AKI as used in the US is 4 to 6 octane levels lower than equivalent petrol per the RON rating however regular gas in the US is 87 Octane (AKI) which still works out to be lower octane than regular unleaded petrol at 95 Octane (RON)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2ynk0o | why don't we coat adult teeth but we do coat baby teeth? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ynk0o/eli5_why_dont_we_coat_adult_teeth_but_we_do_coat/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpbdtrj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Dentist here. \n\nBy coating I'm assuming you mean sealants? \nWe DO seal adult teeth. The teeth we seal in children are their first adult teeth at around 6-8 years old. If you mean fluoride varnish we coat small children's teeth with at age 2-6 this is just to help protect teeth in children who may be more susceptible than other to decay. \n\nHope this answers your question. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9vlxsa | ; why are public toilets so much harder to clog than private toilets? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9vlxsa/eli5_why_are_public_toilets_so_much_harder_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"e9d82kq",
"e9d84fx"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"It's usually toilet aper that clogs up the pipes, not the excrement. Public bathroom either have extremely thing toilet paper or none at all, whereas at home u have 2/3 ply and use it liberally causing the blockages. ",
"Public toilets usually have access to much higher volume water supplies than at homes. This is due to the amount of people they are expected to be able to service; your home unit likely has a tank where water is stored for the next flush and is slowly replenished. But public toilets may need to be flushed often and without the failure points of the tank mechanism.\n\nInstead the public toilets can flush with a blast of a larger amount of water than the domestic piping can handle, and this also serves to blast stuff down the drain with more force. Also they really want to avoid clogs so they can make the drains bigger too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5n12b9 | why are people worried about using growth hormones on animals to be eaten? | Is there any true effect of eating meat that had hormones used on it? Because the people saying these things tend to be pretty crazy, and I wonder if anything about it is true. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5n12b9/eli5why_are_people_worried_about_using_growth/ | {
"a_id": [
"dc7vv92"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It is not known if animal hormones effect humans or not. These things are difficult to test. \n\nCurrently the FDA says they are safe, so many companies use them.\n\nSome consumers are afraid of chemicals and sensationalist articles can make anyone afraid of anything, and it has created the idea that consumers should \"worry\" about additives, and this makes it profitable to market hormone-free products even without any proof the hormones are negative. \n\nI can't honestly say if the growth hormones are safe or not; I can say the FDA says they are, but the FDA has been wrong before. The issue is far from final, and more research needs to be done."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4ejdaj | why do old computers use more energy than newer computers? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ejdaj/eli5_why_do_old_computers_use_more_energy_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"d21zvn6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Over time, components get smaller, and can eventually be combined into a single package thanks to transistors getting smaller. Some could be so small they were eventually integrated into the CPU. Essentially, fewer chips usually use less power than more chips that perform the same function.\n\nCPUs also have seen power savings. AMD and Intel both introduced dynamic under clocking about a decade ago. Before then, if a computer was doing nothing it was still running at it's full clock rate. They litterally process a command called NOP that means \"no instruction\", or don't do anything. With dynamic underclocking the processor can underclock itself, which saves power.\n\nMulti-core processors also help reduce power. Not only can cores underclock themselves, they can also go into a low power mode or be turned off completly. Dynamic over clocking was also introduced, this lets a single core run at a higher than rated clock rate while reducing the clock rate on other cores. This does not reduce power usage but increases efficiency when a single core is maxed out but the others are doing very little.\n\nWindows 8 and 10 can show the dynamic clock rate, but only show one clock rate. This doesn't make much sense since each core can have a different clock rate."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
bx1otq | why do people tell you to turn off your phones when you're experiencing a thunderstorm? do phones actually affect the possibility of getting struck by lightning? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bx1otq/eli5_why_do_people_tell_you_to_turn_off_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"eq2fu2l",
"eq2fulw",
"eq2fv5p"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"I was always told to stay off landlines and never get a shower/bath during lighting, I never heard this with cell phones. I’m intrigued to see what the answer is for this.",
"Technically speaking, the cell phone has an antenna, and this makes it a little more likely for you to get struck by lightning if you are holding one then if you are not. But the effect is incredibly minor, and it doesn't matter if the phone is on or off.\n\nThe only possible advantage to turning your phone off during a thunderstorm is that if lightning strikes very close by, it can cause an EMP pulse that could damage electronics. And if you already have power running through your phone because it is on, then it takes less additional power to burn it out. But this is still a very unlikely scenario, and not really worth worrying about. Maybe, maybe if you are all alone on a small boat in the middle of the ocean, but then you have bigger problems to deal with.",
"Old wives tale, or new wives tale.\n\nEither way it doesn't affect the possibility of getting struck by lightning.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nLightning is formed by ionized particles in the clouds moving to the bottom of the cloud and opposite ionized particles in the soil moving to the top of the soil.\n\nThe general rule of thumb is that lightning strikes at higher elevations. So rooftops, trees, big metal objects.\n\nSo if you're up on top of a hill in a plain/mostly flat area, and you're the tallest object around, you're the most likely thing to get hit by lightning.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nThe scale of voltage is absurd btw, we're talking 100 million volts or more in potential differential, your dinky little 5.2v phone battery doesn't make a lick of difference to lightning; if you're the tallest object around and the conditions are just right, doesn't matter if your phone is on or off, you're getting hit by lightning.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nWhat you should really do? Get low and seek shelter, stay away from standing water and lanky tall structures (short antennas, trees), you never know when a puddle is the shortest path to ground, or when the result of a lightning strike might cause a structure to fail and fall on you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.