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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
32rbow | what's up with reddit formatting requiring two returns to display a line break? | What's the background behind this? I mean, I've been around since the internet was born (and before) and the line break formatting on reddit just seems bonkers.
Surely there's a reason why? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32rbow/eli5_whats_up_with_reddit_formatting_requiring/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqdxqsh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Reddit's formatting uses [markdown](_URL_0_), and there are actually two different types of line breaks. First, the larger one where you use two returns....\n\nlike this. And then the second, smaller one, where you end a line with at least two spaces, and use a single return... \nlike this. Notice that the gap is a bit smaller in this second case."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax"
]
] |
|
8w7p4y | what is a baphomet? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8w7p4y/eli5_what_is_a_baphomet/ | {
"a_id": [
"e1tdstq"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Baphomet is a demonic deity that has a goat like appearance with a goat's head & horns, & fuses aspects of the masculine & feminine (penis & breasts). Thought to have the power of prophecy & grants magical power. \n\nFolklore has it as a demon worshipped by the Templers to gain strength in battle but that is most likely propaganda that was used to seize Templers assets after the crusades. Baphomet was also used in Germany as part of the witch hunts. \n\nCommonly Baphomet has become another version of Satan or the devil & basically interchangeable. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2lq0i3 | why can i eat the center of baby corn but not regular corn? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lq0i3/eli5_why_can_i_eat_the_center_of_baby_corn_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"clx42bi",
"clxd6hk"
],
"score": [
19,
19
],
"text": [
"You could eat the cob of a normal sized ear of corn. It's all fiber and there's really no nutritional value. We eat baby corn whole since it's way too much work to get it off the cob and since it's smaller it's bite sized anyways.",
"Baby corn like baby. Small and weak. When baby corn grow more it grow big and strong. Become tough. Big adult corn hard to chew because strong."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
y44yy | how scoring works for olympic wrestling? | I seriously don't get it at all... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/y44yy/eli5_how_scoring_works_for_olympic_wrestling/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5s6oi5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There are two styles of \"Olympics wrestling\". They are called freestyle wrestling and Grecco-Roman (waist-up grappling only) wrestling. They are much different than WWE. \n\nThe goal of Freestyle wrestling, which is similar to collegiate wrestling is to throw and pin your opponent to the mat. The difference between Freestyle and Greecco-Roman is that you can use your feet offensively and defensively.\n\nNow for the scoring. \n\n\n* Takedown. occurs when a man takes his opponent to the mat from a standing position. This is worth one point, but can be worth three if the opponent is brought down onto his back in a position of exposure (danger), and five if a high amplitude throw is involved.\n\n* Exposure - turning an opponent's shoulders to the mat. Once the line of the back area breaks a 90-degree angle, points are scored. This can occur both from the feet and on the mat. A wrestler who holds his opponent in a danger position for five seconds will receive one extra point.\n\n* Reversal - when the man underneath completely reverses his position and comes to the top position in control, he has scored a reversal, worth one point.\n\n* Escape - when an athlete works to come out from the bottom position (after being under dominant control) and gets to his feet, facing his rival, he has scored an escape, worth one point. This can only be awarded if there is an active attempt by the top wrestler to hold the bottom wrestler down, and if there is hand attack as the wrestler excapes. Note that this score seldome is given.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2bdn7y | wtf is a money market account | I've just [seriously] started looking at my 401k and where the money is allocated. A lot of my money is in a money market (don't know why) and looking at the prospectus and fund facts can't figure out wtf is going on.
I have been on subs like /r/personalfinance and /r/investing - but they're way over my head. Please help! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bdn7y/eli5_wtf_is_a_money_market_account/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj4acid",
"cj4kmom"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"A money market account is designed to be the safest possible investment account: it is a mutual fund with the entire goal of maintaining $1/share forever. As such, it won't actually return anything, particularly now when interest rates on treasury bonds, the only investment safe enough for such an account, are so low. If it does provide a return, it'll be in the form of a very low dividend.\n\nUsually it is used as a settlement account: if you deposit your money with a brokerage, it sits in a money market account until you do something else with it like invest into other funds. If you sell your shares of those funds, or if you get a dividend that isn't being reinvested it'll go back into the money market.\n\nAll that said, a money market account should not be a large part of your portfolio, at that point you might as well put it in a checking account. Certainly if there are no returns, there is no tax-deferral benefit from a retirement account either.",
"A money market mutual fund is what you are talking about, I think. This is a very safe, low-return type of mutual fund. Most investors refer to funds in a money market mutual fund as \"cash\" because it is so low-returning and stable in value. If you put in $100 and come back in twenty years, you will probably have.... Only a little bit more than $100. But they almost *never* lose any money (which they call \"breaking the buck\").\n\nA money market bank account is a different thing, it's basically just a savings account by another name."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
d6irzy | why does playing a video on my pc not have any lag or stutter, but playing a game does? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d6irzy/eli5_why_does_playing_a_video_on_my_pc_not_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"f0tel8c",
"f0terke",
"f0tf0x8"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Playing a video is much \"easier\" for you PC then rendering a game.\nFor the video, you only have on big file and the GPU just have to give this file with all his colors and motion back.\nWhen you play a game, your GPU and CPU have to work a ton of files. Also your GPU has to render every frame. It has to calculate how shadows has to fall, has to display a lot of different things at ones.",
"It's the same reason it's much more difficult to paint a picture than to look at one. With a video (which is just lots of pictures played one after each other very quickly), the work of making the pictures and stitching them together has already been done, you just have to play it back. When you play a game, your computer creates each picture on the fly, then stitches them together as you play.\n\nSo videos are much easier to run with good performance, but the drawback is you have no control over what you see. You can't decide that the plot of a film is going to change half way through because it's already been made, you're just watching the result. In a game, you decide where the character goes, what they do, etc because it's being made on the fly according to what buttons you press.",
"The video is already rendered and encoded at a certain number of frames-per-second. The only processing required is to grab each frame from memory and display it on the screen.\n\nA video game has dynamic frames that must be rendered *in real time*. After all, the current frame will change depending on what you've done up until that point. Want to turn around in a forest? - We must now try to create a frame every 1/60th of a second that renders every tree, leaf, and texture from your exact point of view at that time.\n\nModern GPUs have become exceedingly good at this, being able to render scenes with hundreds of thousands of individual polygons at 144 fps. However, nothing is perfect, and your GPU may struggle with rapid changes or bottlenecks with other pieces of hardware (such as the CPU) - this is why you might occasionally experience stuttering."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3bj0zp | why does a the most well-funded and powerful military on earth outsource to companies like blackwater? why don't they just...do it themselves? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bj0zp/eli5why_does_a_the_most_wellfunded_and_powerful/ | {
"a_id": [
"csmka6q",
"csmkjfu",
"csmq3vp"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because even if you're funded 100billion, you still ask, is it cheaper to do it myself or find someone that'll do it for CHEAPER",
"It's because it's more efficient for jobs the military isn't as good at or doesn't have the flexibility to do so.\n\nContractors like Blackwater aren't there to do the fighting a company of Marines might do, but they might be doing jobs from driving supply trucks to setting up kitchens on base to even providing janitorial services. \n\nThe military decades ago realized it was too expensive and time consuming to bring in recruits to do nothing but be a janitor or a truck driver, and also it takes months to train said recruit to be qualified to do so on deployment. The numbers said it's cheaper and more efficient to hire a company to do those types of jobs for you, and they have the flexibility to hire a ton of guys quickly to do those jobs as required and when the contract is up, it's done with\n",
"So there's an efficiency thing, but there's also a control thing.\n\nBlackwater, in their hayday, was not a Defense Department contractor. They worked for the State Department. It was easier for the State Department to hire groups like Blackwater for their personnel protection needs. Also, if the State Department was up to anything they didn't want to be widely known, it's easier to keep a private contractor quiet. As much as the military has a habit of keeping secrets, there's a lot more paperwork and such if they used military assets.\n\nThat being said, the DoD does contract with plenty of private companies to provide all kinds of services (though usually not combat) because it's cheaper.\n\nEDIT: Also, inter-agency politics. DoD and State Department don't always like to play nice with one other. They often treat each other like they're opposing groups. For the most part embassies have never been protected by military personnel, but by State Department employees. Now those employees are increasingly private contractors for cost and liability reasons."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1y706y | if mercury is the closet planet to the sun, why is it so cold at night? wouldnt the molecules move faster all around. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1y706y/if_mercury_is_the_closet_planet_to_the_sun_why_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfhwbxw",
"cfhwcu8"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Its so cold at night since it has basically no atmosphere, without an atmosphere there is nothing to keep the heat from the sun close to the planet (atmospheres do that in a few ways). ",
"The heat radiates out into space."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1qqt7d | why do graphic cards have ddr5 when ddr4 just being release? | I saw ddr5 like a year ago on GCs. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qqt7d/eli5_why_do_graphic_cards_have_ddr5_when_ddr4/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdfikjt"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Graphics cards use GDDR memory, which is not the same thing as DDR Ram chips."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6ostcm | how does the energy we get from carbohydrates and caffeine differ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ostcm/eli5_how_does_the_energy_we_get_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkjxfck"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Caffeine stimulates hormonal and neurotransmitter responses that make you more alert and aroused. It doesn't actually give you energy, it just makes you feel more energetic, or switched on. Carbohydrates are made up of sugars which are literally used as energy."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
qs9mq | chord progressions and keys | I can read sheet music, but am completely lost when it comes to chords and key. Help! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/qs9mq/eli5_chord_progressions_and_keys/ | {
"a_id": [
"c401kum",
"c405bix"
],
"score": [
10,
2
],
"text": [
"Let's start from square 1. Notes only have meaning in relation to each other [harmony]. They are merely names for different frequencies of sound. \n\nA melody is an arrangement of notes that has a certain shape. Basic melodies have a beginning, middle, and end. A key is just a language, it's a guideline to *which* relationships we should be paying attention to. \n\nIts only function is for performers reading music, because you can translate a set of notes (since they are *absolute frequencies*) into any key. Just like \"月”and \"moon\" both mean the big ball orbiting the earth, \"A\" \"Bbb\" both mean 440 Hz.\n\nChords are additional ways of shaping the music. If a melody is a sentence, then chords are grammar, punctuation, and spelling. \n\nFor example, say you have a song in the key of \"C\", which just means every note is played as a relation to the note \"C\", and you want to finish part of the song, but you don't want the whole thing to end. You can play a \"C\" chord in first inversion. \n\nSince a C chord is the strongest chord in the key of C, you get a sense of closure, but since C is not the bass note (the strongest note of a chord), there's still a little bit of uncertainty. This is the equivalent of a comma. \n\nBasically, it's just a language and you have to know what to put where. Obviously this falls apart in post-modern anti-structure music, and it holds a different meaning in Eastern music (which uses a different \"language\" to describe notes), but it's a good place to start.",
"Not exactly an explanation, but a website I've used in the past to help understand music theory in the past is _URL_0_. May be worth taking a look for you. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"musictheory.net"
]
] |
|
4rrbky | if most of the universe is vacuum, what creates distance between galaxies? if spacetime is flat, what's between them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4rrbky/eli5_if_most_of_the_universe_is_vacuum_what/ | {
"a_id": [
"d53hqu0"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The distance between them is full of...nothing. That's it. \n\nImagine your room. Measure from one side to the other.\n\nNow take everything out, including the air. It's still the same distance (assuming the walls haven't collapsed inwards).\n\nSpace being flat or not means that its physical laws are the same in all directions, so it doesn't really have anything to do with this, as such. What it doesn't mean is that there's no third dimension or anything like that."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4muwyu | do diet soft drinks prevent you from weight lose? | I have read about this diet thing numerous times and I still don't get it. Some people say diet soda makes you gain weight some say it doesn't.
If someone can give me a definitive answer would be nice.
For ex: If I drink .5 gallons water + eat 1,5k calories per day
OR If I drink .5 diet tea/coke + eat 1.5k calories per day.
Would there be a difference in the weight lose speed/effectiveness? They don't explain this and I think this is what people are concerned about.
Or If I drink .5 gallon water + eat 4k calories per day
vs
Drink .5 diet coke + eat 4k calories per day
Would I gain weight faster with diet coke?
Thank you | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4muwyu/eli5_do_diet_soft_drinks_prevent_you_from_weight/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3yhq9o",
"d3ymkbt"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"the most rational argument I have heard for this is that by consuming fake sugar, you will crave real sugar. And by rule, you will cheat.\n\nNot sure how legit that is... if theres science to sugar flavors causing sugar cravings... None that I have ever seen. I dont put much stock in it myself. Or atleast knowing the risk should help avoid the outcome.\n\nbut the alternative theories seem to wander off into tin foil hat land that aspartame and sucralose is a poison and all that.",
"From an article about a study in 2011. Basically it says that when your brain senses sugar, it expects calories, but is getting none. So your body continues to crave calories until you give it the calories you told it you were giving.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nSubstances like Splenda and aspartame may have zero calories, but your body isn't fooled. When it gets a \"sweet\" taste, it expects calories to follow, and when this doesn't occur it leads to distortions in your biochemistry that may actually lead to weight gain.\n\nAs far as \"sweetness satisfaction\" in your brain is concerned, it can tell the difference between a real sugar and an artificial one, even if your conscious mind cannot. Artificial sweeteners tend to trigger more communication in the brain's pleasure center, yet at the same time provide less actual satisfaction. So when you consume artificial sweeteners, your body craves more, as well as real sugar, because your brain is not satisfied at a cellular level by the sugar imposter. There is even research suggesting that artificial sweetener use may ruin your body's ability to control calories, thus boosting your inclination to overindulge."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/07/21/are-diet-sodas-making-you-fat.aspx"
]
] |
|
45zxai | how does the public vote translate into which electoral voter is selected? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/45zxai/eli5how_does_the_public_vote_translate_into_which/ | {
"a_id": [
"d01cnu0"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
" > Does each party choose their electors and the public are voting on which party's electors to send\n\nYep, that's exactly what it is. Each party in each state submits a list of names prior to the election equaling the number of electoral votes that state has, and those are the people who cast their votes if their candidate wins."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
wqyi9 | how do animals live without brains? | I'm watching "Freaks in the Ocean" on Nat Geo Wild, & it's mentioned a few of the sea animals not having brains, but using nerves to function. How does that work? What controls the nerves? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/wqyi9/how_do_animals_live_without_brains/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5fo7vd",
"c5fofkx"
],
"score": [
3,
13
],
"text": [
"The control center in some simpler animals is called a [nerve net](_URL_0_). It is a simplified processing center that allows these animals to respond to stimuli. ",
"[It's similar to how you don't need a brain to pull your hand off a hot plate](_URL_0_). The pain signal travels to your spine. The spine dispatches two signals; the original one that passes more or less straight through to the brain to let it know what happened, the other directly to your muscles to pull away. You literally react before you can think about it, and it's all very primitive electro-bio-mechanical stimulus responses. A bit further up the evolutionary ladder from simple nerves you have nerve nets, like [ZebrafishHatchery said](_URL_1_).\n\nFun fact: this is why in the navy we were taught that if you suspected a fire on the other side of the (metal) doors, to test with the back of the hand. If it's hot enough to burn, your body will close your fist and pull your arm to your chest. If you used your palm you could inadvertently grasp a part of the door and prolong the exposure and damage."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_net"
],
[
"http://www.spine-health.com/conditions/spine-anatomy/pain-signals-brain-spine",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/wqyi9/how_do_animals_live_without_brains/c5fo7vd"
]
] |
|
b97kgk | any reason there isn't a second person perspective? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b97kgk/eli5_any_reason_there_isnt_a_second_person/ | {
"a_id": [
"ek2rrdg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There is a second person perspective. It is where a story is being told to another person about you. In a game it could be where a person is looking at you or talking to another person about you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
22zpft | why does it feel like your finger is "purring" when you run it along the surface of some laptops. | Title says it all. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22zpft/eli5_why_does_it_feel_like_your_finger_is_purring/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgrz71t",
"cgrzapx",
"cgs4nhv"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Well computers do have a hum to them from the capacitors and other components + vibrations from the hard drives and fans so its most likely that.",
"I wondered about this too, and after a quick wiki research, it seems to be [friction instability](_URL_0_), but it may be more to it than that.",
"This happens on a MacBook because of the aluminium casing. When the laptop is plugged in to charge, rubbing the case will make it feel like it is vibrating. As you run your finger over the case you are producing very minute static fields which are amplified by the charger (maybe they [Apple] didn't ground the casing properly) and cause the purring feeling. Unplug it and it stops. I've replicated this with my macbook over and over with different power sockets and power adapters."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friction#Dry_friction_and_instabilities"
],
[]
] |
|
2samg5 | are paper toilet seat covers (aka ass gaskets) really more sanitary than naked seats or just another example of humans being wasteful? | They seem so thin... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2samg5/eli5_are_paper_toilet_seat_covers_aka_ass_gaskets/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnnobg8",
"cnnok62",
"cnnosa8",
"cnnx2p9"
],
"score": [
44,
8,
22,
6
],
"text": [
"Chances are, there's nothing particularly hazardous on the seat itself regardless. A toilet seat is not a hospitable place for bacteria to hang out. \n\nIf anything, they're a peace-of-mind device.",
"There is no chance of you getting an STD from a toilet seat. They provide nothing sanitary at all. Just a waste of money",
"People often confuse \"dirty\" and \"unsanitary.\" You can have sanitary dirt, and clean things can be unsanitary, if they're not also sterilized.\n\nThey do not help with sanitary at all. The paper is sitting there right next to the toilet, toilet germs are going to spray into the bathroom every time someone plops, sprays, or flushes, and this includes onto the paper.\n\nThey do, however, help with dirty. A bit of dried pee, a tiny smear of poo, or even just someone's ass-dirt, those are all blocked by the paper.",
"You can actually find more bacteria on the toilet seat in the average home than in most public restrooms. This is due to the fact that they have to(or are supposed to, anyway) clean the bathrooms many times a day, up to hourly. Whens the last time you cleaned your bathroom twice in a day, much less every hour?\n\nMy vote is that they are wasteful and don't do anything more than provide you a little peace of mind that you're not doing the naked butt kiss with the guy who was in there before you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
74gnyu | onion routing of mobile traffic | So, I'm interested in all things privacy and security and all that technothriller goofiness. I decided to experiment myself and experience first hand the pushback from companies when going dark. I am not in any way an it-genius or hacker or anything like that
The question: I installed and configured Orbot on my android cell. All traffic is going through TOR. I also deleted all Facebook apps from my phone and log in to it through the Orfox browser.
I know that I'm far from completely dark now, but, what exactly am I hiding now? What has become invisible or untrackable about my mobile data traffic? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/74gnyu/eli5_onion_routing_of_mobile_traffic/ | {
"a_id": [
"dny39ed",
"dny6uc8"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Is Orbit android exclusive? I've got an iPhone and can't find it. There's a lot orbit apps that don't look right",
"Onion routing hides the origin of the traffic. It doesn't obscure the traffic itself though.\n\nFacebook and Google are still tracking your interests, your searches and whatnot. They just don't know where your network traffic started. But if they just send your phones gps info, they still know where you are physically. So if you use Google maps thru TOR, Google still knows where you are. It's just that the origin of the network traffic ,that normally comes out of the cell tower of your cell provider, won't be known ."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1cld0u | if cispa is designed as a cyber terrorism bill that impedes individual privacy, why are so many big industry lobbyists throwing money at it? wouldn't their secrets be legally just as revealed? | a [list](_URL_0_) of the lobbyists and the money they gave to get this passed. Also, and please don't take this the wrong way, I am sickened by the thought of it but I am also very cynical; If our country is already ruled by the money these corps pay to our government, isn't unrealistic to think there is anything we can do to prevent the passing of this bill *eventually*. Wouldn't it be better to allow a version of it to pass that is watered down so we can at least get our say in since stalling it does nothing? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1cld0u/eli5_if_cispa_is_designed_as_a_cyber_terrorism/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9hnsw6"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The average American citizen doesn't have the wherewithal to make use of the information available. The companies that are backing it do, though. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://maplight.org/us-congress/bill/113-hr-624/1116571/total-contributions"
] | [
[]
] |
|
5yoi55 | carbon capture & sequestration (ccs) | Bonus question - what is the most efficient way to pull CO2 out of the air? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yoi55/eli5_carbon_capture_sequestration_ccs/ | {
"a_id": [
"dertbkn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It essentially means one removes the CO2 from the fuel or during the combustion (carbon capture). The CO2 is then sequestered or stored, most commonly in geological formations that will retain the storage intact.\n\nSome of the projects are pretty straight forward. The natural gas in the field has a CO2 level higher than what the gas to the end user is supposed to have. So you take the gas through the gas processing system and remove the excess CO2. Once separated you pipe the CO2 to the CO2 injection well and push it back into the reservoir.\n\nOne approach to reducing CO2 at a big scale that has been investigated is whether one should process the natural gas even further to remove all CO2, and separate the remaining into natural gas liquids and hydrogen. For power plants and shipping hydrogen would be easily accommodated. For domestic supply one could mix in the natural gas liquids closer to the markets to rebuild a natural gas suitable for gas burners, etc.\n\nThe other type of CCS is where power plants and refineries extract CO2 from exhaust and processing. This is quite a bit more challenging to extract, and furthermore it is more difficult to cost effectively sequester (because usually refineries and power plants are close to markets, and finding suitable geological structures will be more difficult.\n\nNone of these methods are aimed at pulling the CO2 out of the air. They're all about preventing CO2 from going into the air."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
30r5cd | how come i can stand up straight just fine on the ground, but when i stand near a ledge or on a small platform i wobble and overbalance? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30r5cd/eli5_how_come_i_can_stand_up_straight_just_fine/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpv18zy"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Depth perception plays a part in helping us balance. We see an upcoming slope, so we're ready to lean forward as we climb. When you're standing on a ledge, your depth perception is throwing you off. If you concentrate on what you're standing on, you should have no issue keeping balance"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
23z0wv | if all the water in my body were to instantaneously turn into red wine, how exactly would that kill me and how quickly? | So this terrifying GIF:
_URL_0_
Got me wondering: what's happening to his body right then? And while chances are slim that what we're seeing is an accurate depiction (or maybe it is? I don't know) of death from fatal red-wine-ification, does anyone think they moight know what would fail first, second, and how long it all would take? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23z0wv/eli5_if_all_the_water_in_my_body_were_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"ch1y70b"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"You would immediately die because water is required for all the chemical reactions that happen in every cell of your body. I suppose technically the brain would be \"dead\" first, but really it would instantly kill every cell in your body."
]
} | [] | [
"http://giant.gfycat.com/ImportantEmbellishedBushbaby.gif"
] | [
[]
] |
|
2bwacp | what would happen if a company that outsources jobs to developing countries began to offer those employees first world wages? | I often see companies like Nike get a lot of hate for underpaying their workers in developing/third world countries. However, these wages are often at or well above whatever they would otherwise be paid by a local company. What would happen to the economy of these country if these companies began paying their employees $8.25 per hour. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bwacp/eli5_what_would_happen_if_a_company_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj9ivgj"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Do you mean about the hate..? People would still hate them for outsourcing. \"If they can pay THEM the wages we have here, why not locally source the labor...\" stuff like that.\nAlso, the price would probably go way up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2lwjsv | how come does my battery lose charge if i don't let it drain completely before charging again? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lwjsv/eli5_how_come_does_my_battery_lose_charge_if_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"clytn83",
"clyu45a"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"This isnt as much of a problem as it used to be. If your device has a li-ion battery, and most do these days, it has no \"memory effect\". The memory effect wore down battery life with improper charger use because plugging it in early would screw up the delicate chemical reaction in the battery, and lower its efficiency. \n\nLi ion batteries don't have this issue, but will still wear out after a few years. Another catch is that if the battery is completely drained, it can become unusable. When your device says 0% and shuts off, it actually still has a bit of juice left, its just preserving it to protect the battery. ",
"speaking of losing battery charge.. i went to radioshack and told the my phone discharges quickly. they asked my phone did what..?? i said discharge quickly.. never seen retail staff laugh so much at a customer"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1lb8o1 | will human colonization of other planets ever be possible? | How similar would the planet have to be for human to survive? Is this the long term goal of all of our space programs? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lb8o1/will_human_colonization_of_other_planets_ever_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbxhvqi",
"cbxi1h3",
"cbxj33q",
"cbxmkoa",
"cbxn42z"
],
"score": [
21,
2,
64,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Possible? Sure, as long as you're not too picky about how you define \"colonization.\" If we wanted, we could send people to Mars for the rest of their lives right now.\n\nTrouble is, they couldn't survive there indefinitely. Between the radiation (which is not deadly by itself, but would induce health problems eventually, statistically speaking) and the *complete* lack of usable resources, it would be a very expensive, very protracted form of suicide.",
"Yes it will be, provided we find a planet suitable for human life. Imagine we found an earth like planet near proxima centauri (our closest neighbor star), and travel hundreds (thousands?) of years to get there safely. We should theoretically be able to step off and breathe normally, then we set up camp and go from there. However in our solar system it's much less likely, we're the only planet capable of supporting life.",
"Look into Elon Musk. The Founder and CEO of SpaceX. He said in June that he has concrete plans to colonize Mars in 15 years. If anyone else on Earth said that I'd instantly write it off, but Elon Musk is seriously a super human. One of those people that literally comes about once a century. \n\nHe is known for having the genius of Nikola Tesla, the marketing chops of Thomas Edison, and the industrial intuition of Henry Ford.\n\nHe founded PayPal, which made him a billionaire when he sold it at 31 years old . However, he was already worth over $300 million after selling his first software start-up at 28 years old.\n\nIts what he did next that will impact humanity for centuries to come. I'm fully convinced that our great, great, great, great grandkids will be forced to learn about Elon Musk in school just as we learn about Thomas Edison.\n\nHe founded SpaceX , and successfully took space flight from an absurdly expensive and novel government enterprise to a viable, profitable, and useful private enterprise. SpaceX developed the rocket that NASA now uses for payloads. Elon Musk's capsule docked at the International Space Station last year; the first ever commercial company to do so. \n\nBesides creating an entire new industry by profitably accessing space and beyond he also founded Tesla Motors. In fact, he is founder and current CEO of Tesla Motors, SpaceX, AND SolarCity (the largest residential solar installer in the U.S.). \n\n[Here's a superb article on this super human](_URL_0_)\n\nHe's been in the news recently because he is Founder and CEO of Tesla Motors. With zero industry experience he entered the auto industry, which is also a particularly well insulated industry [(recent and related article)](_URL_1_). He was considered naive by industry insider's, and you can't blame them. Building and marketing a traditional vehicle, much less a revolutionary electric vehicle, is a skill that would take most people a lifetime to master. So how's he handling it?\n\nTesla Motors stock is up over 450% in the last year. The latest Model S received the best safety rating of ANY CAR EVER, and won the coveted \"Motor Trend Car of the Year Award\" in 2013. \n\nThis has all genuinely shocked the industry. Imagine the logistics and knowledge it takes to RUN an auto company, much less INVENT one from scratch. Then, realize that he is currently CEO of not just Tesla Motors, but also the CEO of SolarCity, and a space rocket company. Oh, and he has 5 kids. \n\n\nIf Elon Musk says he has concrete plans to colonize Mars within 20 years. I genuinely believe it. There's 7.1 billion people that could say the same statement, and I'd laugh, but Elon Musk is truly something different. \n\nThe more you find out about him the more you think he can't be human. At first I figured \"OK He founded a few companies. He's a good business man. Plenty of those to go around\".\n\nBut when you look deeper this dude didn't just found PayPal - he MADE PayPal. He doesn't just invest his way into companies he MAKES companies. \n\nSpecifically, his goal is to guide humanity to a new age. Solar panels, electric cars, space exploration, colonizing freaking Mars. Only now does it hit me he IS human, he's just from the future. I would gladly give this guy a trillion dollars just to see what would become of it.\n\n",
"Sometime soon, 12 astronauts will land on the surface if mars and begin to conduct research on the planet. They will be loaded up will the latest technologies and materials. They will be living in small cabins that are practically seamless. This HAS to be seamless due to the harsh Marsion conditions (sand, dust, etc.) there is also a rover that is capable of driving the surface and even being able to send data back to the main station on mars about what is under the ground in that specific area. So human colonization is pretty much on its way. Just in small scale. Granted, mars is not the most peaceful and inhabitable place to live, but its a start. ",
"Colonizing planets orbiting other suns is, for now, science fiction. We have no feasible way to travel such extreme distances. Multi-generational ships or 'warp drives' are hypothetical proposals, but still fiction. \n \nCloser to home, Mars, would have to be the testing ground for colonizing another planet. There are many people who believe this is feasible in the next couple decades, certainly in the next century. But there are many, many hurdles to living there, let alone getting there. \n \nLet's ignore how we get there for now. Living there, assuming we can build structures to to safely house us, energy sources to support it, and food enough to feed us, we still don't know how to necessarily populate it. Little to nothing is known about pregnancy in non-earth gravity. Would a woman be able to bring a child to term in gravity less than half of what it is on earth? Unknown. Let's say it doesn't turn out to be that big of a problem. Human children are born on Mars, how does that child develop in 40% gravity? Unknown. We know it's highly unlikely it would be the same as on earth. One of the important reasons all animals play when they are young, is because it helps their bones and muscles to develop adequately to the world around them, we have to be strong enough to hold ourselves up against our gravity. \n \nIf multiple generations could live out their entire lives on Mars, they would still be human, but they wouldn't be Earthlings, they would be Martians. If they returned to Earth, they would likely find our planet very unpleasant, and tiring. It's possible their muscles wouldn't strong enough for them to breathe properly. \n \nAnd I didn't even mention how the bacteria we carry with us might reproduce in a Martian colony."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jul/17/elon-musk-mission-mars-spacex",
"http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/22/elon-musk-condemns-the-perversion-of-democracy-in-texas/"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
59lhiv | how did mexico get to be such a massive lime honcho? | Limes originated from Asia, so how come Mexico such a major source of limes, and how did limes become staple in Mexican cuisine? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/59lhiv/eli5_how_did_mexico_get_to_be_such_a_massive_lime/ | {
"a_id": [
"d99hjsq"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Potatoes were made in the Andes and are now popular in Ireland and East Europe. Tomatoes and Pasta aren't native to Italy but an Italian would slap you if you said their aren't part of their cuisine.\n\nCentral America is a good place to grow them and the culture incorporated them into their culture. That's the magic of globalization."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
7lwg4n | instead of rockets, why not fly spacecraft on the back of a plane as high as possible, then release into space? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7lwg4n/eli5_instead_of_rockets_why_not_fly_spacecraft_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"drph33w",
"drph6qn"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The altitude isn't really an issue.\n\nTo stay in orbit, a spacecraft needs to be moving *sideways* at 8000 meters *per second*\n\nA plane can get you a few miles up, but a big cargo hauler aircraft is only getting you ~200 meters per second. It's still up to the rocket to get the next 7800.",
"There are some rockets that fly this way (see: [pegasus style launches] (_URL_0_) \n\nThe problem is that the payload size is small. Yes you can put the shuttle orbiter on the top of a 747, but it is missing the big orange tank which provides most of the fuel to get to orbit. A 747 flies at a top speed of around 300 m/s fully loaded like that and to an altitude of about 6 miles (10 km). To orbit, you need to get about 15x higher and go 25x faster, so while it's doable for small payloads, it's not a workable solution for anything of decent size"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(rocket)"
]
] |
||
2j9esi | why does certain fast food give us diarrhea? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2j9esi/eli5_why_does_certain_fast_food_give_us_diarrhea/ | {
"a_id": [
"cl9law7",
"cl9rq6u"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"it irritates the stomach which causes the stomach to quickly want to remove the food, which results in the shits.",
"It doesn't, unless you're *very* unaccustomed to greasy food.\n\nFood poisoning is always a possibility, but it's pretty rare with fast food, since the stores usually either don't handle raw meat at all (Taco Bell comes to mind) or raw meat goes directly from frozen to the grill."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
35qc11 | can someone with higher alcohol tolerance actually drink more? | Say if a newbie drinker and an alcoholic both drink 20 shots. And their BAC is .40 each. They are both equally close to alcohol poisoning right? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35qc11/eli5can_someone_with_higher_alcohol_tolerance/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr6s4ku"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Those with high alcohol tolerances can function with higher concentrations of alcohol in their system, including when poisoning/death is involved.\n\nIn real life, a new drinker would likely be puking, falling over, and passing out around .3, and .4 would be life threatening. Many lifetime alcoholics function just fine at .3.\n\nWhile .4-.48 is the accepted concentration where death by alcohol poisoning occurs, there are many cases of people surviving double to triple that with no ill effects, all of which were long-term alcoholics. Some of them even pass 1%, a death sentence to most people.\n\nEven the [National Institute of Health](_URL_0_) is sure to state \"in most drinkers\" when referring to the risk of death, since alcoholics can regularly go above and beyond those limits without dying thanks to their tolerance.\n\nTL;DR No, they are not equally close to alcohol poisoning, as the alcoholic's tolerance allows higher concentrations of alcohol before ill effects occur."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/AlcoholOverdoseFactsheet/Overdosefact.htm"
]
] |
|
54u4gn | how did castles with deep moats and drawbridges get invaded? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/54u4gn/eli5_how_did_castles_with_deep_moats_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"d84zuo3",
"d850ljg",
"d850odq",
"d851nme",
"d85bf52"
],
"score": [
37,
5,
22,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The invaders constructed ladders and bridges over the moat and up the walls of the castle. Or they stood outside and murdered everyone who came to the castle until eventually the people inside had no food. ",
"All sorts of nasty things could have been done. Fantasy authors have come up with many ways, and some of them might even be realistic. Fill the moat over time, tunnel under the moat and walls, toss dead bodies over the wall with catapults, throw boulders at the walls until they collapse, sneak over the wall and sabotage the gate, and many other methods might have been used. The number one way to beat an enemy walled inside would be to surround all ways in or out, then just sit and wait. If they have a water source inside, they'll starve after a few months/years after they eat everything in sight, including their shoes. If they don't have fresh water inside the walls, they likely will only last a few days to weeks depending on their storage capabilities. ",
"Siege engines which ranged from what /u/slash178 mentioned, to large covered towers with extending ramps were used. Catapults and trebuchet have been used for a long time too, to bombard the walls themselves, or the people within the walls. If you can destroy their morale, or just kill enough of them, you win. In some long sieges people got really creative too, such as lobbing dead animals over the walls to spread disease. Keep in mind that disease was a frequent decider of a military victory in those days.\n\nThere were also sappers and miners, who would (depending on conditions) try to tunnel under the walls either to get beyond them, or more often to undermine them and cause sections of them to collapse. Moats could be filled in over time, and you had nothing, but time.\n\nThe single biggest siege tactic however, was to wait 'em out. You could hunt and forage, and have supply lines as the besieging force, the people inside the castle only had what stores of food and potables they might have had. You could stay out of the range of their archers, pummel people on the battlements with siege engines, and as slash178 said, kill anyone who tried to get out or bring anything in.\n\nThere was also treachery (why break in if you can pay off a gate-guard?), poisoning water sources, and pretty much every other nasty trick human minds could imagine... which turns out to be good at this kind of thing.",
"Oftentimes the defenders were simply starved out. In such cases, the defenders would either surrender eventually or be too physically weak to resist the final assault. \n\nIn a siege, the attacking force has the advantage because the defenders are by definition limited in terms of food and water. ",
"If you read medieval histories, or at least medieval European histories, sieges were usually avoided unless a castle or a city had high strategic value. Up until the 14th century or so, a lord could only make his knights serve a certain number of days in the field for an offensive campaign--40 days was standard, though terms varied. Even with siege engines, a well-defended castle could hold out longer than that.\n\nThis changed somewhat in the 13th/14th centuries, as more lords started hiring mercenary companies and expecting soldiers to fight for pay, but even so, sieges were expensive. If a lord ran out of money, the soldiers wouldn't fight for him.\n\nThere was a famous French captain during the Hundred Years War, a guy named Duguesclin, who was famous for being about to take castles, but he never did so by siege. It was usually by bribing castle guards to open the gates or even, on at least one occasion, sending in prostitutes to keep the garrison occupied while his soldiers climbed the walls."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
c9ypl5 | when doing cardio-like exercises, why is a lower heart rate suggested in order to be in the fat-burning ‘zone’ and a higher heart rate ‘cardio’? | I guess I’m wondering if you can burn just as much fat being in the cardio zone (higher heart rate) as you would if you kept it lower? What’s the real difference besides the heart rate? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c9ypl5/eli5_when_doing_cardiolike_exercises_why_is_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"et4dyq8",
"et4x7q0"
],
"score": [
4,
5
],
"text": [
"I haven’t found any studies confirming the idea of a fat/cardio heart range. But here’s what unsourced online articles say:\n\nThe fat burning range is the heart range within which the relative proportion of fats to carbohydrates burned, rather than the total caloric value thereof, is highest.\n\nIf you work out at higher intensities the proportion of fat burned decreases, but the total calorie amount of fat burned increases. So too does the effort required increase. If effort, not time, is your key limitation then working out at a lower intensity would be more worthwhile.\n\nThis article comments that working out at a lower intensity doesn’t trigger post workout calorie burn. \n_URL_0_",
"Exercise Physiologist here:\n\nI'll try to make exercise metabolism as simple as I can.\n\nWhat is burned by the body and the active muscles, primarily fat and carbohydrates, is dependent on intensity of activity. As for heart rate, it is measure of intensity (lower heart rate, lower intensity; higher heart rate, higher intensity). It is also important to mention that as we discuss this, we are talking about the muscles involved in activity, muscles that are not involved can be using energy differently.\n\nWhat is burned by the muscle depends on the intensity of activity (again, heart rate is a measure of it). Why is intensity important to what is burned (more fat vs more carbohydrate), the amount of oxygen that can be supplied to the exercising muscles. Fat requires a fair amount of oxygen to be turned into energy for exercise, carbohydrate can be broken down with and without a lot of oxygen. When we are exercising at lower heart rates (lower intensity), we are able to supply plenty of oxygen to turn fat into energy. As heart rate goes up (increased intensity), we are able to provide less oxygen to convert fat to energy, and we shift over to more carbohydrates. As intensity continues to climb, we are less and less able to supply oxygen to convert fat into energy, and the muscles become more and more dependent on carbohydrates.\n\nSo, at lower heart rates/intensity we are able to supply enough oxygen to burn fat. At higher heart rates/intensity, we are less able to provide oxygen to burn fat and shift to a higher and higher percent of carbohydrates because they don't require as much oxygen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"www.builtlean.com/2013/04/01/fat-burning-zone-myth/amp/"
],
[]
] |
|
5jjqnk | how can stars like our sun *implode* on themselves at the end of their existence? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5jjqnk/eli5_how_can_stars_like_our_sun_implode_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbgn43s",
"dbgnm7z",
"dbgo3zf",
"dbgqi26",
"dbgwqvs"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The force of the fuel burning is pushing out, and the force of gravity on its mass is pulling in.\n\nWhen the forces are out of balance it will either explode or implode. \n\n",
"Our sun runs on a supply of hydrogen it burns to create fuel. When the hydrogen runs out, it will begin burning the helium it contains. When the helium depletes, our sun will be out of fuel. It will crave more and slowly shrink because it is essentially malnourished. It will bear down on its own mass and without enough strength, the star will collapse on itself. ",
"When it runs out of hydrogen to burn, and is either not hot enough to burn helium or runs out of helium as well, it'll stop exploding- there's no outward acting force. But the mass of those fuels still remains and the gravity due to that mass forces it contract. Now, depending on it's mass it can either become a white dwarf, a neutron star or a black hole. Our sun would become a white dwarf. ",
"Stars begin to 'shine' when the inward force of gravity forces the star's hydrogen atoms so close together that they begin fusing into helium (and light and heat are given off as part of this reaction). That fusion of hydrogen into helium creates an outward force that holds gravity at bay - for the time being. A star can be in this phase for billions of years; for example, our sun has been fusing hydrogen into helium for roughly 5 billion years and has another 5 billion years of this activity left.\n\nAt some point, the star runs out of hydrogen to fuse and the inward force of gravity begins to overcome the outward force from fusion. At that point the gravity begins forcing the helium atoms in the star close together to the point that the helium atoms begin to fuse together into an even heavier element. But there's a problem: the outward force created by fusing helium isn't as strong as the outward force created by fusing hydrogen. This can be said even more so when the star runs out of helium to fuse and begins attempting to fuse heavier elements created from the helium fusion.\n\nAt some point, the inward force of gravity overcomes the outward force of atom fusion (often times this occurs when the star begins attempting to fuse iron). When that happens, gravity begins condensing the star inward on itself.\n\nNow, here's the factor that determines whether the star will form a nebula, supernova, or black hole: the star's mass.\n\nIf the star's mass is about the size of our sun, what will happen is the star will become a nebula, meaning its outer layers will be forced off into space by gravity's effects, and all that will remain is a dense pit of atoms. Our sun will one day become a white dwarf in this manner. The reason it becomes a white dwarf and not a neutron star or a black hole is because gravity can't overcome electron degeneracy pressure among the atom's particles, so the atoms will be kept intact.\n\nIf a star's mass is significantly larger than our sun, what will happen is the inward force of gravity will be so large that the star loses nearly all its mass in a supernova explosion (think of a nebula as layers of the star floating away and a supernova as layers of the star exploding off into space). This is a very violent event. At that point, the star will meet one of the following fates:\n\n1) The star will become a neutron star because the electron degeneracy force will not be strong enough to hold off gravity and gravity will literally force the star's electrons into the nuclei of the atoms, and as we know the electrons' negative charge will be canceled out by the protons' positive charge. A neutron star is a tiny pit from the core of the original star and is extremely, extremely dense.\n\n2) The star will become a black hole. If the star's mass is large enough - and thus gravity strong enough - the neutron degeneracy pressure (force repelling neutrons from each other) will be overcome by gravity and gravity will force the neutrons in the star together such that they fuse and collapse in on themselves and create a singularity that is essentially the opposite of the Big Bang.",
"Here a nice video that explain it very well.\n_URL_0_\n\nAnd here a resume.\n\n1) Star that are between 1/3 and 8 times the mass off our Sun only fuse Hydrogen in their core, they can't fuse Hydrogen in outer layers.\n2) At some point they run out of Hydrogen to fuse in the their core, but it won't be hot enough to fuse Helium. That said, the enormous mass of the sun will contract the core and the heat trapped inside will concentrate and the temperature will go up. Up enough that it will start to transfer heat faster to the outer layer of the sun where it will fuse the hydrogen there. \n3) The outer layer fusing hydrogen have a lot less gravity keeping them in check than the core have so it will expand into a Subgiant, then a Red Giant.\n4) Now so big, the gravity at the surface of the sun will be weak, and the hydrogen fusion in the outer layer will blast material into space making the Sun lose 1/3rd of it's mass.\n5) During all of this time, the core will still contract more and more eventually reaching the point where it can fuse Helium. The core expand keeping most of the energy from the helium fusion and giving less energy to the outer layer. \n6) Less energy from the core mean less hydrogen fusion in the outer layer and contraction.\n7) The cycle restart again but now you replace Hydrogen by Helium and Helium by Carbon. \n8) The Sun become a red giant again, but this time it will blast over half of it's mass into space, while carbon accumulate in its core.\n9) Helium fusion is not as stable as hydrogen so it have huge spike and low point which blast even more mass.\n10) By the time it run out of helium, only the Core remain, full of carbon and fusion stop. It is now a white dwarf.\n\nIt never really implode, it blast off his mass out in space. It's supernova that improde and that implosion create the supernova. Here a nice video that explain it.\n\n_URL_1_\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfvMtCHv1q4",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWx9DurgPn8&t=113s"
]
] |
||
1vy9bo | how can dna store 700 terabytes of data in a single gram? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vy9bo/eli5_how_can_dna_store_700_terabytes_of_data_in_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cewxm7o",
"cewxsl5",
"cewxvyi",
"cewxwxj",
"cex3089"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
23,
13,
7
],
"text": [
"A single cell in your body is just a few microns long, but fits ~2m of DNA. DNA has a double helix structure that gets tightly compacted. Proteins known as histones bind to the DNA and help wind it up into a dense fiber of coiled coils. The idea behind storing data in DNA is to convert the genetic code into binary. Since the genetic code consists of two sets of complementary base pairs: adenine/thymine and guanine/cytosine. To convert to binary assign one pair a value of \"0\" and the other a value of \"1\"",
"Because the way our biological processes use DNA utilizes these molecular bits of information VERY well. \n\nDNA is structured a lot like computer bits (A-T)=0 (G-C)=1, now that means down your chromatin (the bundles of dna chord) any diffirent lego block will shift all the information coded into it differently.\n\nThe way we use these strands of DNA makes it even more versatile. We can synthesize a ton of different proteins just by modifying the mRNA system that unzips, reads, and builds protein structures from a given chord of DNA. The chemical variety of proteins happen from just one little different acid in the building process, kind of like how one different lego block in a strand of DNA changes the whole info of the strand.\n\nIf you can imagine that system, you can see how much information is packed inside DNA from all the different proteins we synthesize from it, and how much info those 2 lego blocks can hold when they are stacked right.\n\nSource: Env Sci major, taking a lot of biology.",
"Think of it close to a computer, except instead of 1s and 0s, it's A, T, C, and G. Each base pair weighs something on the order of 6x10^-22 grams, and a terabyte is only 8x10^12 bits, which leaves several orders of magnitude left over for whatever factors they use to convert base pairs to bits.",
"The DNA is made from a string of 4 elemental nucloid stractures Which are reffered to as T A G C. you can think of them as a Base 4 bits (a regular bit has two states 0 and 1). Now in a gram of DNA there are millions upon millions of these \"bits\". the molecular mass for each pair of nucloids is roughly 2x10^-22 which means there about 4.4*10^21 pairs in a gram which is ALOT\n\nedit: by \"base 4 bits\" I meant there are 4 possible states for each basic memory unit. It is equvilant as to reffer o each unit as a 2 regular bits unit.",
"First, how do we define data? Data is measured in bits. Each bit has two states like on/off or voltage/no voltage or dash/dot (morse code).\n\n- 1 bit: 0 or 1\n- 2 bits: 00, 01, 10, 11\n- 3 bits: 000, 001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110, 111\n\nWith each bit, we double the number of possible combinations. One byte = 8 bits = 256 combinations. Each combination represents something on a computer. For example, the letter \"a\" is represented as 01100001. If you put enough of these together, you can store quite a bit of information.\n\nEach DNA base pair has 4 possible states. This means that each DNA base pair contains 2 bits of data (2 bits = 4 combinations). With this in mind, one gram of DNA works out to 2^(5,600,000,000,000,000) combinations = 700 terabytes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3xsrhw | why did it take so long to make a landing/reusable rocket? what technological advances made it possible now? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3xsrhw/eli5_why_did_it_take_so_long_to_make_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy7hu1d"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I think it could have been done with the technology of the Apollo era. It was simply never a big goal of the space program. The goal of Apollo program was to put a man on the moon, and it was easier to do that fast with disposable rocket parts. The space shuttle program had goals of landing and reusability, but not for a rocket. If the space program had the goal and funding to do this any time during or after the Apollo era, they could have done it. Whether it would have been as cost effective is another question."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3bc2rx | is it possible to influence the rotation of earth using gigantic rockets attached parallel to the ground? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bc2rx/eli5_is_it_possible_to_influence_the_rotation_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cskrqah"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Nope, because the rocket exhaust pushes on the atmosphere which is pretty tightly coupled to earths rotation. The only way to do this would be to make sure the exhaust does not ever come back to earth."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
d0ptzi | what are the little blue balls in some hand sanitizers? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d0ptzi/eli5_what_are_the_little_blue_balls_in_some_hand/ | {
"a_id": [
"ezbgzmx"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Some put little beads of shea or other things to add moisturizing effects to counteract dryness it can cause or fragrance to make it smell nice."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
59nl2h | how does buyin a house work? mortgage | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/59nl2h/eli5how_does_buyin_a_house_work_mortgage/ | {
"a_id": [
"d99v8bi",
"d99w5hx",
"d99wecv"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Brace yourself, math follows.\n\nWhen you get a mortgage, you have some kind of down payment, and you borrow the rest of the money from the bank. The bank charges you interest on it - let's say, 5% a year. So if you have 100k and you borrow the other 700k, then in the first year you will have to pay 700 x 0.05=35k in interest. If you also pay 20k of the principal amount over that year, then next year you will only have to pay 680 x 0.05=34K.\n\nIn reality this is calculated not per year, but per month. You COULD get a mortgage where you pay a fixed amount of the principal per month - let's say 1500 per month in principal - and whatever the interest is on top of that. 5% per year means 0.416% per month. So in the first month you owe 700k, you pay 1,5k plus 700k x 0.416%=2912 in interest; next month you pay 1,5k plus 689,5k x 0.416%=2868.32 in interest; etc. As you see, your payments are very high at the start, and get lower as you pay off the principal.\n\nSo in practice, to make it easier, the bank will do a calculation to average all of this out over the life of the loan. You know you will be paying 2,829 per month every month until you pay off the entire 700k. But in your first month, it will be 2820 in interest and only 9 in principal. In your last month, it will be 2820 in principal and only 9 in interest.\n\nGoes without saying, if you don't have this level of financial literacy, you probably should not be buying an 800k house.\n\nEDIT: Oh yes, that 5% number is an over-simplification. It's very likely that the bank will not give you a fixed rate for the entire life of the loan. The bank will probably have the right to change the rate every year or every half year, depending on certain factors in the economy (mostly what your country's Central Bank is doing). So just because you see a monthly number today, doesn't mean that monthly number won't go up or down later.",
"The default estimate is likely a 30 year mortgage, which is the most common. There are also 15 year mortgages, but your payment is a lot higher because you're paying over shorter time frame but not double because you will pay a lot less interest.\n\nThat $2829 may or may not include other costs associated with owning a home, such as property taxes and homeowners insurance. Those are often paid along with your mortgage monthly and the funds are held in an escrow account to pay the annual or semi-annual bills. Those likely run $1000/mo or more on a $800k house -- my escrow payment alone runs about $750 on a $450k house.",
"All good answers. I would add, your interest rate will be decided by your Credit Score, along with other factors.\n\nAnother question is, do you really need a 800K house? Just because you might qualify for such a large Morgage, might not make it prudent to use that much. The higher the value, the higher the taxes.\n\nI would recommend r/personalfinance and their Q/A on Mortgages to you. They have good advice."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
29ef0l | when i am driving 60mph in my car and notice there is a fly in there, is the fly flying 60 mph? | I was driving with my top down yesterday and the most annoying fly was buzzing around my head. Is the fly flying at 60mph to stay even with my face location? Does that mean that it is flying faster than 60 mph when if it flies from the back to the front of my car? Why doesn't it end up stuck against my back window when I'm driving or thrown towards my windshield when I slow? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29ef0l/eli5_when_i_am_driving_60mph_in_my_car_and_notice/ | {
"a_id": [
"cik3h5o",
"cik3m39",
"cik3o88",
"cik51mf",
"cikarae"
],
"score": [
50,
4,
10,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Good question, sir! Let's look at this at the fly's point-of-view. \n\nI am flying inside a car that is moving at 60 mph. Is that guy sitting down at 60mph as well?",
"If it's within the confines of the cabin it's being carried along at 60mph by the vehicle just like you are. That means it can fly around in there just as normal (ignoring any additional turbulence you get from having the roof down).\n\n\nIf it flies out of the cabin space and into the air rushing over the car (i.e. leaves the relative safety of the cabin space) then it's not so much flying 60mph as it would be trying to withstand the force of 60mph worth of air rushing past it.",
"All boils down to the reference frame as others are saying. From the fly's perspective you are sitting still and the world is moving around you. From an outside observers perspective you are traveling at 60MPH. At any time, anybody is correct to say they are sitting still and it's the world that is moving around them from their perspective. This is one of the guiding principles behind the theory of relativity, and once you understand this concept and a few more it's really interesting stuff to get in to.\n\nEdit: Here's another interesting thing to think about: You have a radar gun and are watching a man pitch a baseball on a flatbed truck moving at 60MPH. The man throws the baseball at 10MPH off the truck (neglecting air resistance). Your radar gun would read that he threw the ball at 70MPH because from your perspective he was already going 60MPH. If you had the same radar gun and were present on the truck with him at the time of the throw it would only read that he threw the ball at 10MPH because from your point of view you were standing still on the truck.",
"Seems to me that most of these responses would not be good for a five year old, so let me explain a bit of a different way:\n\nAll movement is \"relative\", meaning when you move you're comparing yourself to something else that is either moving or not moving. When we drive on a road, lots of the stuff around you (like trees) are staying still, so \"relative\" (or compared) to them, you're moving really fast! Compared to other cars on the road driving the same direction you are, you're moving slower, but compared to cars going the other way, you're going really fast!\n\nThe same is true for the fly. Since you, the fly, and the air in your car are not moving relative to eachother that doesn't mean you're not moving... in fact, you could be going really fast compared to stationary trees =)\n\nBasically, going fast is only important when you think about it as compared to something else moving. Don't forget, you, the car, the fly and the earth are also hurtling around a star which is hurtling around the center of a galaxy too!",
"[Watch this excellent video](_URL_0_) of a guy explaining the concept to actual 5 year olds."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://youtu.be/y8mzDvpKzfY"
]
] |
|
4cqtyd | how did the term xxx originate? | Whoops, forgot to specify. I meant pornography. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4cqtyd/eli5_how_did_the_term_xxx_originate/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1klzp8",
"d1km4vr",
"d1km52z",
"d1km65p",
"d1kzyqq",
"d1l28ws"
],
"score": [
15,
63,
10,
2,
7,
16
],
"text": [
"In reference to alcohol, it was a measure of strength: three X's being stronger, and therefore more desired, than one X",
"The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) is responsible for rating movie content in the US -- G, PG, PG-13, R, and so on -- so that people have some idea what they might be getting into. The system has been tweaked over the years, and used to feature an \"X\" rating.\n\nSome highly acclaimed movies were rated X, including *The Evil Dead* and *Midnight Cowboy*, but over time the rating started to be associated with pornographic films. To attract attention, some of those films would claim to be \"XX\" rated or even \"XXX\" rated. No XX or XXX ratings officially existed, but it can be an effective marketing ploy anyway.\n\nThe MPAA no longer uses the X rating, but the idea of it remains.",
"For booze or for porn? For booze, I've read that the \"X\" was a way to mark the strength of beer. X was the weakest, XX was in the middle, and XXX was the strongest. This carried over to moonshine where the X represented how many times it had gone through the still, with XXX meaning the moonshine had been distilled three times and was almost pure alcohol.\n\nFor porn, it comes from movie ratings. X used to mean adults only, but not necessarily porn. For example, Midnight Cowboy, which won an Oscar, was rated X. If you didn’t want to pay the MPAA to rate your movie or knew it would be rated X anyway, you could just slap it on there yourself. Porn movies would obviously be rated X, but to make sure you knew they were porn they would toss extra Xs on there to mean “it’s not just adult, it’s *adult*.” Ratings have obviously since changed, with X now being split between R and NC-17, but the XXX stuck around.",
"For pornography, it was a result of the MPAA's rating system. There technically wasn't an X rating -- X was the MPAA declining to issue a rating at all.\n\nWhy more X's? Well, if X was too naughty for the film ratings people, imagine how naughty XXX must be!",
"In the [Coat of Arms of the City of Amsterdam](_URL_0_) they are said to represent *fire, floods and the Black Death*.",
"Xander Kane was an extreme sports athelte and x-factor due to his unpredictability. Resulting in the name XXX. He also lived in a 3 strike state, so his 3rd crime resulted in his third 'X' and life in prison.\n\nHope this helps "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coat_of_arms_of_Amsterdam"
],
[]
] |
|
3n0m3j | if you exhale and hold your breath, why do your lungs not fill up with co2? your metabolism is still going and producing it as a waste product. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3n0m3j/eli5_if_you_exhale_and_hold_your_breath_why_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvjrnbv"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because that CO2 can only be made from O2. \n\nGlucose + 6 O2 - > 6 CO2 + 6 H2O.\n\nBecause you take 6 oxygen molecules out and put 6 CO2 molecules back the volume remains constant. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
fe0wpp | why can insulin not be taken orally but other hormones can? | For example contraceptive pills and antidepressants. I know insulin would get digested and broken down before it gets to the bloodstream but how come these don’t? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fe0wpp/eli5_why_can_insulin_not_be_taken_orally_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"fjl5ng1"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Some hormones, like birth control pills, are \"small molecules,\" and they can pass through the stomach unchanged and with full function. Other hormones, like insulin, are proteins, which are chains of amino acids connected together. Stomach acid in particular cleaves the bonds that hold these amino acids together, degrading the protein and rendering it in pieces. This is why proteins in general can not be taken orally, we digest them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6t6mgn | why do we have to sleep to restore energy? why can't we just eat more? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6t6mgn/eli5_why_do_we_have_to_sleep_to_restore_energy/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlibswv",
"dlibtat"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's maintenance. You could just keep adding gasoline, but sometimes your car needs to have it's oil replaced or it's wheels rotated. And it's hard to do that while the car is in motion. Your brain needs to scrub itself clean, getting rid of waste and sorting out tangles. \n\nWhen you're sleep deprived, you're not low on fuel, but the pistons are having a hard time slogging through that thick muck that used to be oil. ",
"Sleep energy and food energy are two different types of things. Energy from food is actual energy, as defined in science. Energy from sleep is mental, it's how ready and prompt your brain is. Sleep is important to rest your mind."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
53d664 | if you have an infection and you get antibiotics why do you not take a large dose right away to kill it and then a lower dose for the rest of the week to make sure it doesn't come back? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/53d664/eli5_if_you_have_an_infection_and_you_get/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7s0u0n",
"d7s3t87",
"d7s8ro8",
"d7sb2jr",
"d7sd7jf",
"d7sdft4",
"d7se5bz",
"d7sf6l5",
"d7sforp",
"d7sg9p1",
"d7sitb2",
"d7sjw0f",
"d7sk5h8",
"d7slq63",
"d7sltq8",
"d7slw98",
"d7slxm7",
"d7sml7e",
"d7smn2l",
"d7sn28y",
"d7sndba",
"d7sppx8"
],
"score": [
1060,
67,
5,
3,
3,
4,
7,
2,
2,
2,
2,
7,
15,
2,
2,
2,
2,
7,
2,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"For some, you do! Some start with a double dose first and the. A single dose for the duration. But too strong a dose can cause side effects and may be more than body can absorb before expelling other ways.",
"1) Like you would expect with any other drug, too much of an antibiotic can cause side effects that outweigh the benefits of killing the bacteria. For example, taking too much vancomycin can lead to kidney damage, or taking too high of a dose at one time can lead to a severe allergic reaction. Generally, infectious disease doctors use the concept \"minimum inhibitory concentration\", or the most dilute concentration at which an given drug is still effective in stopping the growth of a sample of certain bacteria, to figure out what dose is most effective without causing too many side effects. \n\n2) While some antibiotics work by directly killing bacteria (like penicillin), others work by merely stopping them from growing and reproducing (like doxycycline). It's also important to know that, at the doses of drugs that we give that are safe for us to take, there will always be some bacteria that survive the first dose. This is also not necessarily due to resistance - it may be that some bacteria are in spots that are hard for the drug to get to, or that the drug was processed by the body before it had a chance to act on all available targets. It's better to make sure to have enough antibiotics in your body over multiple generations of bacterial growth for these to have a good antimicrobial effect over anything surviving the previous doses, than to take a super high dose that is likely more harmful anyway. This is super important for some infections like tuberculosis, where taking several antibiotics at once *every day for several months* is necessary before enough bacteria are killed to stop the infection.\n\nIt should be noted that for some infections, the responsible microbe is so vulnerable to antibiotics that we can indeed kill off enough bacteria with one dose to stop an infection, and let the immune system do the rest. For example, if you're unlucky in getting lucky and you get gonorrhea, a single shot of ceftriaxone will fix you right up.",
"Let's look really quickly at how antibiotics work, in the general sense. Antibiotics seek out bacterial cells, and they work by affecting things that bacterial cells have that human cells do not. For example, human cells do not have cell walls, while many type of bacterial cells do. Penicillin works by keeping a bacterium from building cell walls. Another difference lies in the structure of cell membranes and the machinery they use to build proteins or copy DNA. Some antibiotics dissolve the membrane of bacterial cells, others affect the protein building or DNA copying machinery specific to bacterial cells. \n\nAntibiotics travel throughout your body when you take them. They enter your bloodstream and kill bacterial cells but not human cells, because there are distinct differences between bacterial cells and human cells. However, there are very few differences, sometimes none at all, between the structure of harmful bacterial cells and beneficial bacterial cells. The reason we don't take a mega dose of antibiotics when we're sick is because we would not only kill the bacteria causing the problem, but also the resident friendly bacteria. This beneficial bacteria keeps us healthy in many ways, and when they're killed off by antibiotics, our health suffers. Additionally, these friendly bacteria stave off other types of more harmful...and more resistant...bacteria, leading to what's called opportunistic infections. Opportunistic infections occur when bacteria from the environment overrun the friendly bacteria damaged or killed by antibiotics. By mega-dosing, we'd make ourselves much more vulnerable to these opportunistic infections, and because they tend to be more resistant, they are harder to combat. ",
"When you take an antibiotic, you're taking a substance that will kill one organism (the infectious bacteria) and try not harm the other (you). So it is a very balanced and precise process. For some antibiotics do have what we call a \"loading dose\". It is basically a larger first dose to get the therapeutic drug level faster. However, these have very specific dosing regimens. \n\nTl;dr: Too much medicine all at once may cause your body undesirable side effects. ",
"Because all medicine is poison. It's just the dose that makes it therapeutic. Some you take a loading dose and then smaller doses for a certain period of time. With others that may not be effective against the organism or it may be too effective against your organs. Child lock those medicine cabinets, folks.",
"Great question! When receiving a dose of antibiotics, the aim is to achieve a concentration in the blood which will stop the target bacteria from growing. This is called the 'minimum inhibitory concentration'.\n\nThere is not much point going above this concentration; antibiotics never 'kill all the bacteria', they just help slow it down, but your immune system is still the most important part of the fight, and without it, all the antibiotics in the world won't eradicate an infection.\n\nDosing above the target concentration does not kill more of the target bacteria, and can cause damage to liver/kidneys which eliminate the antibiotic, so it's lots of extra risks with no gain.\n\nThe killing of 'good gut bacteria' mentioned here is more related to using broad-spectrum antibiotics - that is, antibiotics which are equally lethal to all bacteria. These are antibiotics to avoid if possible - instead you want to take an antibiotic with a very narrow spectrum of activity, which targets the organism causing your infection and not much else.",
"Okay, you have a miss perception here.\nYou don't take the initial dose to \"Kill\" the bacteria. You take it as a loading dose. A loading dose puts an extra amount of medicine into your body, then the lower dose maintains the effective range. many medications work in an Effective range, below and you won't kill the bacteria, above and you are doing harm to self. \nBasically if you took lower doses the entire time, it would take longer to get to the effective range, and essentially waste time. The body is also constantly flushing out the antibiotic as well so its tougher to get to that range. With the loading dose, you are already in effective range and even with the medicine being flushed out, you maintain it with a constant dose which spikes it right back into range. This is why you take antibiotics at a certain time, for example a prescription for doxycycline may look something like this: Take 2 pills to start then one pill every 8 hours. The first 2 pills puts your body in the effective range, now the other pills every 8 hours keeps concentration of antibiotic in a maintenance range, ie maintenance dose. It is killing bacteria the entire time it is in effective range. \n\nYou want the bacteria to be completely gone, even with a little left it could further divide and continue infecting, this is why you do a whole course of antibiotics even if you are feeling better. \n\nI could go deeper into this explaining how antibiotics work and their mechanisms aren't all the same. Plus it also depends on what type of bacteria you have, Gram + Gram -. If you just took low doses or a single dose and missed doses, you wouldn't be in the effective range and the bacteria could potentially continue to reproduce, you would also be giving the bacteria just enough antibiotic to tease it and to help it learn a resistance. \n\nSource: current medical student. \n\n\nSee this chart, [](_URL_0_)\n\nedit: missconception to misperception ",
"Don't forget to take probiotics after a round of antibiotics! Probiotics is more important than a multi-vitamin everyday. Anti's kill all your good bacteria and bad bacteria starts to over grow and take over. ",
"For antibiotics like azithromycin, this is the case! But the key with antibiotics is to take them at regularly scheduled intervals. The idea of an antibiotic is to help your immune system fight off an infection, but as with any drug, large doses rarely work well in the human body.",
"For some antibiotics you need a high dose initially, and then lower doses for the remainder of therapy. For others you need the same dose throughout. Certain antibiotics work better when the concentration of them is high in your system for only a short period of time. Others work better under moderate concentrations over a longer period of time. This is also related to the type of bacteria you are targeting, as for some bacteria you will need high concentrations of antibiotic vs other bacteria that may need lower concentrations but for more days of therapy. It's also based on many factors including the rate of absorption into the body and rate of elimination out of the body. ",
"\nI just have to throw this in here for the younger set.\n\nWay back when, in the 1960's, there were no pills or elixers or IV's for penicillin. \nAll that existed at first was a rather thick gummy solution that had to be injected from a very large bore needle in a child's or adult's buttocks.\n\nSo they did give you one big dose. It hurt like hell. Once I squirmed and cried so much the needle broke off. The doctor yelled at me.\n\n\nAnd that was about it, from what I recall, perhaps Mom watched over you to see that you recovered from the scarlet fever or whatever it was that made you sick enough to actually visit a doctor and get a shot!\nPenicillin was a miracle drug back then, just an fyi.",
"Infectious disease doc here. Many of the answers focused on risks versus harm, however thats only part of the issue. \n\nBacteria have what we call an MIC (minimum inhibitory concentration) which means what concentration of antibiotics are needed to kill a particular bacteria. In general, bacteria don't die faster if it's much higher than the MIC. Often it's time above the MIC that matters most (which that combined with how fast the body gets rid of antibiotics leads to how often you take the med).\n\nNext, how do we get above the MIC fast? Some antibiotics we do give \"loading doses\" to achieve the MIC faster. But in general one dose is enough to get above the MIC and then stay there until the next dose. \n\nYour why not a lower does once you start improving is also related to the MIC. If you achieve a lower than MIC concentration you probably won't kill the bacteria. Occasionally we do use \"low dose\" antibiotics but this is usually to prevent infections where the antibiotic concentrates. \n\nTldr- you need to achieve a certain 'threshold' concentration of antibiotic to kill bacteria - higher concentration does not mean faster/better killing above that threshold. \n\nExcuse any typos since I'm on mobile. \n\n\n",
"Pharmacist here! \n\nA lot of answers here are really spot on! There are some ABX that give a loading dose to immediately load the body with an effective concentration to begin treatment, and then maintenance doses to maintain the blood concentration. Usually, you see this in what we consider \"Dose-Dependent\" ABX, like a Z-Pak (2 tablets on day one [500mg], then 1 tablet daily [250mg] for four additional days).\n\nThen, there are \"Time-Dependent\" ABX, like penicillin/amoxicillin that are dosed multiple times a day at a set dose (Amoxicillin 500mg four times daily for 7 days). We do this because it doesn't matter how high the blood concentration is of the medication, it will still do its job as long as it is above a certain threshold, but in order to be effective, it needs to be above that for an extended period of time. \n\nTake this image for example : \n_URL_0_\n\nThe graph on the left is a time dependent drug, and it does the job so long as the concentration is above the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC). The graph on the right is a dose dependent drug, and it does the job when the Area Under the Curve (AUC) is higher than the MIC. The AUC can be interpreted as the blood concentration, in a nut shell. The larger the AUC with the least amount of side effects, the better. ",
"Colonel Hurd explained it to me like this: l want your body to encounter the pathogen and begin fighting it. Only then do we introduce the antibiotic. He said he was a surgeon in Desert Storm, and l made the mistake of saying he must have had it easy. \" no, l had to treat enemy wounded.\"",
"As others have mentioned this does indeed happen for many antibiotics. This is called a loaded or loading dose. This is particularly relevant for antibiotics that need a stable level in the blood, and so the loaded dose is used to get to that level. Think a out it like filling a pool. You initially want to dump a bunch of water in, then some will get taken out (metabolism) and some gets put back in (additional doses). Little more in depth, but loading doses are particularly common for gram-negative infections. ",
"Worked as a pharmacy technician for 3 years, many cycles are in fact done exactly this way. A common usage is azithromycin, or a \"Z pak\" you double dose, or even 3 or 4 times depending on the reason for taking, and if you have taken it before. This is very common for chlamydia or gonerrhea infections. \n\nThe reason why you never just take a huge amount the first day then a small does is side effects. They get pretty harsh. No one will take 12 amoxicillian then 1 a day for a week. ",
"Speaking as a physician, it really depends upon what type of antibiotic you're using. \n\nOne of the largest classes of antibiotics are beta-lactams - these include penicillins and cephalosporins and are used for a broad number of infections. These kill bacteria by interfering with cell wall synthesis, and are dosed according to 'time above MIC', where MIC is minimum inhibitory concentration. This is the minimum concentration of antibiotic at the target site to inhibit growth of the pathogen you're intending to treat, and is measured using graduated strips of antibiotic placed on a petri dish. Ideally, you'd give a patient a continuous infusion of these antibiotics, to give the minimum amount to stay above the MIC, and to avoid side effects. In reality, most of the time we divide these doses every 4-6 hours, and this achieves the same goal.\n\nConversely, antibiotics of the aminoglycoside class, like gentamicin kill in a concentration dependent manner, to put simply, they work best with a high peak concentration or more technically an AUC above the MIC (the area under the concentration curve between the serum concentration and the MIC). These are often dosed with a single large dose in patients with severe infections, and save patients from gram negative sepsis, whilst awaiting sensitivity information from culture, so a less toxic antibiotic can be used long term.",
"Intensivist MD here. I know in other settings there can be some salt between the two, but in both units I work in (a VA hospital and a tertiary care, high level referral center with lots of high a acuity, immunocompromised/ecmo/transplant etc pts) I do rounds with a hospital residency trained pharmacist every day. Both their \"book knowledge\" and \"I've seen this 100 times this is what we should do knowledge\" improve the care of the patient AND make me a better doctor in every single case. The pharmacists I have worked with in this setting have been uniformly outstanding, and these dual rounds are one of the highlights of my day. I am frequently disappointed by how these highly trained, intelligent, PhD level experts are discounted by patient families and other staff as \"secondary\" to us physicians, when in fact, they are absolutely integral to the team. I can't count how many times they went above and beyond their duties to really save the day, and am continually surprised at how humble and easy to work with they are. I say this as a physician who spent 9 years doing residency/fellowships in internal medicine, pulmonologist, cardiovascular medicine, and critical care medicine, that frequently the pharmacist is simply better informed on.their area of expertise and also detached enough from the situation to make truly meaningful suggestions to the plan of care.\n\nTl;dr- a good, hospital residency trained pharmD is a world expert-level resource that gets nowhere near the respect they deserve in working with physicians to provide the most benefit with the least collateral damage. Much love pharmD's, thank you for saving me and my patients every day.\n\nEdit: infrequent poster, was to be reply to.comments that docs and pharmacists are often seen at odds over this stuff. I apologize for poor placement.",
"Most oral antibiotics taken are time-dependent, not concentration-dependent. They bind to the bacteria and the bacteria dies when it tries to replicate. Big doses don't do you any good in this scenario because the limiting step isn't the amount of antibiotic, it's how fast the bacteria are replicating. \n\nThere are other scenarios, but this is by and far the most relevant to the question. \n\nSource: pharmacist ",
"-Source: am a nurse who studied this a bit in school. Thought it was interesting so I studied a bit more on my own. I could be wrong, but this is my understanding-\n\nSo, in addition to what others have said, its' worth pointing out that most antibiotics work by one of 2 major mechanisms. Some are bacteriocidal, they kill the bacteria that they encounter or make it easier for the body to kill the bacteria. The other are bacteriostatic. They make it difficult/impossible for the bacteria to reproduce or grow. Since the bacteria have a very short life, you just have to keep them from reproducing until they die. \n\n In the case of a bacteriocidal antibiotic, (penicillin is the most famous example, though there are many others) you often find an initial bolus dose and then maintenance dosing after that. The concern you can run into is that many of these critters will release toxic shit after you kill them, so if you kill them too much too fast you can actually harm the patient, in addition to concerns about side effects and other concerns already outlined. \n\nIn the case of bacteriostatic antibiotics, (like tetracyclines) you have to keep taking them until the critters are all dead. If you don't, they'll start reproducing again and then you're back up shit creek. These are often the chronic infections that never seem to go away no matter what you do. In the case of a bacteriocidal antibiotic, the important thing is to get a therapeutic level and keep it that way. With meds like this it's very important to take your stuff on time, or you give the little bastards a chance to start to rally. Starting with a large dose, however, wouldn't really do any good but it could expose the patient to more risk of harm or adverse side effect. ",
"Think of your body as a bucket and the antibiotic as water. Now imagine the bucket has a hole in the bottom. \n\nEvery day, one gallon of water leaks out of the bucket. But to clear the infection, you need to keep at least an average of one gallon of water in the bucket at all times. \n\nIf you only fill up the bucket once a day with one gallon of water, there will only be an average of half a gallon of water in the bucket over the day. \n\nHowever, if at first, you fill the bucket up with two gallons of water, there will still be a gallon of water in the bucket when you refill it the next day with a second gallon of water. \n\nBy starting with two gallons of water or twice the normal antibiotic dose, you'll always be above the gallon of water you need in the bucket. \n\nThis is why we often times start with twice the normal dose on the first day. \n\nNote: Pharmacodynamics are a lot more complicated than this. I'm just trying to explain in simple terms. ",
"There are multiple reasons that large doses are divided:\nTo minimize side effects from antibiotics such as gastrointestinal disturbances (diarrhea, nausea, etc) this is also the reason patients are told to take some antibiotics with/after food consumption \nTo maintain a therapeutic concentration (steady state) in the plasma for a period of time. This is important especially since bacteria are not always completely eradicated with just one large dose versus multiple divided doses (look for studies on Google) For many bacteria, it takes generally ~10 days of a drug regimen to kill the bacteria at least X% (numbers may be a little off)\nSometimes absorption is more effective in smaller doses than larger doses (like with calcium)\nPharmacokinetics is another consideration (absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion)\n\nSource: Student Pharmacist \n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.derangedphysiology.com/php/Pharmacokinetics/images/loading%20dose.JPG"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://medimoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/good-pic.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1at0fr | why do we measure internet speed in megabits per second, and not megabytes per second? | This really confuses me. Megabytes seems like it would be more useful information, instead of having to take the time to do the math to convert bits into bytes. Bits per second seems a bit arcane to be a good user-friendly and easily understandable metric to market to consumers. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1at0fr/why_do_we_measure_internet_speed_in_megabits_per/ | {
"a_id": [
"c90hkws",
"c90hrfi",
"c90hu03",
"c90j73g",
"c90jcuc",
"c90k1tu",
"c90kwun",
"c90lcye",
"c90n08o",
"c90n46p",
"c90oqtq",
"c90r0wr",
"c90uyfs"
],
"score": [
2,
78,
6,
10,
413,
68,
72,
8,
3,
4,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"When you store things on a harddrive your computer organizes it into 8 bit sections (bytes). Other parts of your computer are moving data around one byte at a time. When you're streaming things from the internet it's coming in one bit at a time. You could lose connection halfway through a byte, so it's bit by bit that matters",
"Plus, from a marketing standpoint, it sounds way better to offer 48 Mb/s internet rather than 6 MB/s\n\nb = bit\nB = Byte\n\n**EDIT: this was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, I realize it's not the actual reason.**",
"Because it makes for bigger numbers.",
"If I were a gambling man, Id say its because it allows for easier back of the envelope calculations for the capacity of the communication channel.\n\nAll electromagnetic communication has a fundamental frequency contained within it called a Carrier. This Carrier can range from 500Khz (AM radio) to Many Ghz. When we are talking about digital communication, The Bit-rate is based on a function of this carrier frequency and on the Signal-to-noise Ratio of the channel. \n\nThere is also Bit Error Rate (BER), which is exactly what it sounds like. Calculations involving BYTE Error Rate would be needlessly complicated, and wouldn't have a whole lot of meaning.\n\nIf this were going to be done in bytes instead of bits, there would be a factor of 8 floating around in these calculations that no one wants to deal with.\n\nI'm not 100% sure about this, but when I took Communication theory in Grad School I'm glad it wasn't in bytes...\n",
"Network speeds were measured in bits per second long before the internet came about\n\nBack in the 1970s modems were 300 bits per second. In the 80s there was 10 Mbps Ethernet. In the early 90s there were 2400 bits per second (bps) modems eventually hitting 56 kbps modems. ISDN lines were 64kbps. T1 lines were 1.54 Mbps. \n\nAs the internet has evolved, the bits per second has remained. It has nothing to do with marketing. I assume it started as bits per second because networks only worry about successful transmission of bits, where as hard drives need full bytes to make sense of the data. \n\n",
"The answer is simple: network connections transmit one bit at a time, so that's the most natural unit to use. It isn't any kind of a marketing trick, and network engineers use the same units.",
"When 2 computers are communicating over a network, they send small pieces of information called packets. If you are sending a file, not all of the packet is a piece of the file being sent. Some of it says who the recipient is, or what number piece is inside that particular packet for example. And the recipient also sends packets back to the sender, saying that each packet was received correctly or if the previous one had a problem and needs to be sent again. So there are many \"bits\" in there that are not part of the file. Bits per second measures the actual physical capability of the sending, but not necessarily how fast a file will move back and forth. ",
"Because bytes are groups of 8 bits bundled together to begin to form words. The network layer really doesn't care if they're grouped together in sixes or tens or twos. It transmits single bits of information. It just so happens that layers ABOVE the network are concerned with bytes, so they use that convention.",
" > This really confuses me. Megabytes seems like it would be more useful information, instead of having to take the time to do the math to convert bits into bytes.\n\nThat’s only because you’re used to bytes. They’re not inherently a more useful measure.\n\nIt’s like complaining that boat speed is measured in knots when all you care about is km/h.",
"Not ELI5... but I don't like most of the answers so...\n\nIts actually a lot simpler than most of these examples. It isn't because of legacy support, conspiracy, or marketing.\n\nIsvara has the engineer's answer, \"Its measured that way because thats how it works.\" But thats not too informative. (sorry, just IMHO)\n\nNetwork speed is measured in bits because you are measuring flow rate, not the size of anything, regardless what analogies you might use to explain how networks work to someone.",
"What a program tells as the transfer rate (Megabytes per seconds) cannot be easily translated to megabits per second on the physical netowork. Most people have mentioned here that a byte takes up 8 bits. But on a network that is not the case, there are error correction/detection bits, and other layer/protocol specific bits. Depending on the protocol being used a byte of 8 bits might take up 9,10, 12 or more bits on the physical connection. The extra bits are used by the protocols involved.\n\nAs an example, programs that deal with real time communications (voice, video and games) usually use UDP instead of TCP. A byte that goes through TCP will use more bits than one using UDP, but at a cost. Anything that gets lost along the way through UDP is ignored. TCP on the other hand pads some more bits in to make sure nothing gets lost. \n\n",
"Companies can advertise a number 8 times higher. Bigger numbers make people happier.",
"OSI model outlines how a network operates. IEEE created standards to make network equipment all compatible with eachother. The standards back in the day defined data being transfered in bits rather than bytes. Subsequently the maximum transmission units on most networking gear these days is 1500 bits. This means that packets (or in this case Frames) contain no larger than 1500 bits. To turn the existing model of networking over to the standard of bytes transfered would be a complete system overhaul. Also speeds look more impressive the higher the number advertised which is why cable companies simply so not convert the number they are offering.\n\nAlso any new networking gear released has to offer backwards legacy compatibility to be considered relevant to install in an existing environment. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
253981 | how blackholes can 'suck up' and hold an infinite amount of matter into a finite amount of space | I looked through several ELI5's regarding black holes, and I understand how they work, but I don't get how they can pull in and crush all matter into a single point. wouldn't they eventually not be able to condense matter any farther? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/253981/eli5_how_blackholes_can_suck_up_and_hold_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"chd9eu8"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I think you meant to say \"how black holes can hold a *finite* amount of matter in an *infinitely small* amount of space\". Black holes do not have infinite mass.\n\nIt should be noted that the the radius of a black hole is a measurement from the center to the edge of the event horizon– the point of no return. What you're talking about is the \"singularity\", the theoretical center point where all the mass supposedly gets squished. The problem is, we can't see any singularities, because they're all inside event horizons and we can't see past the event horizon (since light can't escape it). We can observe black holes from a safe distance, but we don't know what's going on inside them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
57heqi | why, in cathode tvs, i could feel that they were on, even though it was muted? | I could always tell if a CRT TV was turned on back in the day, despite of not being in the room.
How come? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/57heqi/eli5_why_in_cathode_tvs_i_could_feel_that_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8rz0ht",
"d8rz10k",
"d8rz6si",
"d8sdbh5"
],
"score": [
6,
8,
17,
3
],
"text": [
"Those tubes generated a powerful electric field and often emitted a faint high pitched whine during operation.\n\nYou were probably hearing the whine or the static crackling.",
"The coils and circuitry used to deflect the electron beam and make it scan the whole screen make noise at a very high frequency (around 15 kHz). You were probably able to hear that whenever a TV was on.",
"CRTs would generate a high frequency sound that some people can hear very well. Even if on a \"blank\" input with no static, you could hear this sound, even in other rooms. Modern flat-screens do not use the same electronics and don't make the same high-frequency sound.",
"As for \"feel\", the \"cathode ray\" machinery actually sprays electrons at the phosphor surface on the other side of the glass from where you look.\n\nThat makes that sheet of glowing glass a giant capacitor. The inside of the screen takes on a negative charge, so the front side of the screen has a positive charge. That charge can do things like attract the hairs on your arm.\n\nIndeed, in older sets, when you turned them off you'd _hear_ the crackle of static discharge as the system sought neutrality.\n\nSo the cathode ray tube both radiates and responds to all sorts of electrical and magnetic charges.\n\nAs models improved over the years lots of techniques applied to reduce the static and electromagnetic side effects.\n\nBut basically you were looking at a gun shooting electrons at you, that just happened to be behind a surface that converted electrons to photons via phosphor.\n\nLots of voltage. Lots of current. Lot of capacitance. Lots of leakage.\n\nSo hear from a distance, feel up close.\n\nThe transformers and cables also had a tendency to \"ring\" at the product of the horizontal and vertical refresh rates, which was high enough to be non-obvious to older ears but super obvious to younger ears.\n\nHigher resolution and higher frequency monitors tended to push some of that out of active range even for the young.\n\nIt is Just a horribly sloppy technology all around. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2d94dc | why aren't "ask..x" subreddits more famous than the outdated yahoo answers? | "The front page of the internet" pretty much the front page of the internet exclusively for Redditors. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2d94dc/eli5_why_arent_askx_subreddits_more_famous_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjn9ezk",
"cjnapuz"
],
"score": [
7,
4
],
"text": [
"Have you seen the answers on those Yahoo forums? My god it's some of the worst misinformation I've ever seen.",
"Because [these](_URL_0_) have a much greater entertainment value."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/yahooanswers/"
]
] |
|
7qugi9 | if the boiling point of water is 100 degrees c/212 f, why do oceans, rivers, lakes etc not have to reach that temperature for clouds to form from them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7qugi9/eli5_if_the_boiling_point_of_water_is_100_degrees/ | {
"a_id": [
"dsrxxgb",
"dsrxyia",
"dsryhli"
],
"score": [
3,
8,
5
],
"text": [
"boiling point means that the average kinetic energy (thats temperature) is above the amount where material goes from liquid to gas.\n\nSome water will still be below that energy level, and even if the average isn't up there then some will still have enough energy to undergo that change. So some of it will evaporate naturally, without the whole liquid boiling (its also why your pot of water doesn't instantly disappear when it hits 100 degrees and boils).",
"Water evaporates all the time from the surface of any water body.\n\nBoiling is when the whole water body starts evaporating at once, not just from the surface. ",
"100C = steam.\n\nWater can become water vapor at nearly any temperature (vapor != steam) otherwise a puddle would never dry up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1xla90 | like i'm five, can you let me know your best definition of an agnostic? | I grew up in a Christian household, and from a young lad I've labeled myself as a Christian. The reason I ask this question is because of a discussion that happened during school in an Ethics class yesterday. My professor was asking what religion we identify with, so the class told him various answers. One student asked the professor and he answered "Agnostic". I asked him what that was (as I have only heard the term a handful of times), and he simply stated "well...there's no way to be 100% certain...", and then laughed and moved on. I have more questions though and really just want to know more about this view. I mean, my professor doesnt seem opposed to the concept of a God-like force during our discussions...but he does seem to have problems with organized religion (which he is not too shy to be vocal about). So i guess basically I'm saying I have not gotten a clear definition from him on it and am now throwing the question to reddit. Thanks a bunch if you can help me out on this! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xla90/like_im_five_can_you_let_me_know_your_best/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfcd2vt",
"cfcd6ze",
"cfcdneg",
"cfceo1g"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Agnostic basically = I don't know.",
"An atheist is someone who believes there is no god.\n\nAn agnostic is someone who is not sure. They think there might be a god, or there might not. Maybe they haven't decided yet, or maybe they think we'll never know but it's at least possible there's a god.\n",
"An agnostic is a person who isn't sure either way that there is a god or not.\n\n[This graph may help you](_URL_0_).",
"When describing your religious beliefs there are two things to note: Whether or not you believe in god(s), and whether or not you claim to KNOW your belief is true. The first is theism or atheism. The latter is gnosticism or agnosticism. If your professor is *purely agnostic* then he's saying\n\n > There is no way to know if there is or is not a god so I don't believe strongly either way.\n\nThis belief is neither theism, nor atheism, but pure agnosticism.\n\nA few more examples:\n\n* Agnostic Atheism (common)\n\n > I don't believe there is a god, but I don't know for sure that there isn't. I'd probably change my mind if you presented evidence.\n\n* Gnostic Atheism (a little less common)\n\n > There are no gods. Period.\n\n* Agnostic Theism (also less common)\n\n > I believe in god(s), but I don't think we can know for sure.\n\n* Gnostic Theism (very common)\n\n > My name is Ken Ham and I know for an absolute fact that the Christian God exists, and I ain't havin' nunna your fancy shmancy \"evidence\" cuz I got all the evidence I need in this 'ere literal-word-o'-god Bible\n\nThe internet doesn't like Gnostic Theists."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://freethinker.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/final6.jpg"
],
[]
] |
|
5m2out | why do cars only visible smoke while in idle when engine is cold? | When cars with cold engines are standing at the traffic light they create white smoke while in idle. When driving it doesnt smoke noticeable. How is this possible? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5m2out/eli5why_do_cars_only_visible_smoke_while_in_idle/ | {
"a_id": [
"dc0fmi4",
"dc0g1zn"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"It's not smoke, it's particles of water vapour that are condensing and sublimating into minuscule droplets and ice crystals. The most plentiful product of combustion is water. It looks like smoke for the same reason you can see your breath when you exhale in the cold. When the car moves the water disperses in the cold, dry air more quickly.",
"It's not smoke ... at least not on a newer car. It's heated water vapor that is visible. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
75j739 | why does it matter if certain species (like rhinos for example) go extinct? is every species really that important to the ecology? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/75j739/eli5_why_does_it_matter_if_certain_species_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"do6ka24",
"do6ko8f",
"do6u2sh"
],
"score": [
3,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Beyond the ecological standpoint, there's an ethical standpoint to consider.\n\nJust because we CAN kill a thing, should we? If we don't have any real benefit in killing off a species (for food, hide for clothing, etc), should we?\n\nIf humans have, in past (and to a lesser extent, present) transgressions, driven species to the point of near-extinction, is it the correct thing to do to just say \"oh well\" and let the species die off, or attempt to repair the damage and preserve the species?",
"Right now, we lack the data to accurately predict the effects of all endangered species going extinct. It's better to err on the side of caution and try to prevent extinction, because once it's gone, it'll take *tons* more effort and money to bring back the species. And at that point, the ecosystem could have changed so much that it is too late. \n\nThe more diverse an ecosystem is, the more stable and resilient it is. Functional ecosystems are not only nice to visit (camping, hiking, tourism), they can provide economic benefits such as absorbing and filtering water (one reason the flooding in Houston, Texas is so bad is that a lot of wetland areas were paved over), stop land erosion, and help preserve soil quality. \n\nThink of it this way. Anything not saved could be lost, so we might end up with a world populated by us and all the creatures that thrive in our presence whether we want them to or not. Pigeons, raccoons, mosquitoes, rats, mice, feral dogs and cats, and things like that that people generally don't like to have around. ",
"There are a lot of problems caused by a species going extinct. The first is it lowers overall genetic diversity, which can cause more problems later. If an ecosystem has 10 species of predator and one is wiped out by disease or climate change, well that sucks but the others can probably fill in the game. However, if an ecosystem has only 1 or 2 predator species and one is wiped out, then the prey population will balloon out of control and start devouring everything else. Each species that goes extinct makes the ecosystem more vulnerable to further extinctions.\n\nThe other problem is we never know what we're losing when a species goes extinct. Everything we eat comes from plants, animals, or fungi. Many medicines come from plants or animals, and I don't just mean herbal remedy woo stuff, but major pharmaceuticals. Lots of other products as well, such as cotton, wool, leather, rubber, and some plastics, among other things. Imagine if some of those species had gone extinct before we discovered their uses. A lot of these are difficult or impossible to synthesize. When a species goes extinct we never know if we're losing some future delicacy or a miraculous medicine or a source of some useful industrial product."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6us25m | why do we need salt when we have cramps? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6us25m/eli5_why_do_we_need_salt_when_we_have_cramps/ | {
"a_id": [
"dluydzu"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"while cramping happens for a number of reasons often times cramping happens because your body is low on electrolytes. \n\nElectrolytes are minerals that your body uses to help function. Salt helps refill the bodies stores that are used when working out or when sick. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2k85um | why does the uk have to pay the eu 2bn euros? | i don't think this is just out of no where but what do i know, surely they have had rebates before just like the other eu countries? if someone could ELI5 or give a comprehensive answer i'd appreciate it. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2k85um/eli5why_does_the_uk_have_to_pay_the_eu_2bn_euros/ | {
"a_id": [
"clit63n",
"cliu5bt"
],
"score": [
16,
2
],
"text": [
"The EU receives regular financial contributions from all of its member states. Rather than setting a flat tax rate, the EU chooses an amount for each country to pay on a case-by-case basis. The EU just re-evaluated those amounts for all its members. Those who had economic contraction now owe less, while those with economic growth (like the UK) owe more.",
"apparently they were not declaring the right amount in previous years then decided to give updated information and are now having to pay up? (which is why it seems to some people a big chunk of money)\n\nif that is the case, dave doesn't really have grounds to not pay. he probably won't pay on 1st of december but will end up paying it in the new year.\n\nthere does not seem to be too much information out there"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4cw26f | why do some people get specific side effects or symptoms and others don't? | Ex: medicine may cause drowsiness or vomiting. One person has drowsiness, the other has vomiting. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4cw26f/eli5_why_do_some_people_get_specific_side_effects/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1lvlmr",
"d1m0px4",
"d1mh3ix"
],
"score": [
49,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Humans are, when you get right down to it, chemically-based creatures. Our unique body chemistry makes us who we are. Medicines are also chemicals. So, let's say we each take a medicine called Metformin. Metformin is Metformin: it contains the same chemicals no matter what pharmacy you get it from; it doesn't change. The difference is in the two people taking it. No two people have the exact same identical chemical make up. So basically you are adding this medicine/chemical to two different pools of unknown chemicals. You may take it and be perfectly fine. I may take it and it causes me to have terrible chest pains (full disclosure: this is a true story). My chemical makeup is simply not the same as yours; something that makes me who I am is simply incompatible with this chemical.",
"Humans are in essence, just a huge number of variables. Remember that DNA affects the configuration of the smallest parts of our bodies, and the smallest change in those parts means chemicals will react differently across all cells in the numerous body tissues.",
"If anyone could answer this question accurately and precisely, they'd be the most famous doctor of all time!\n\nIn the less precise sense, its because we are all slightly different. Exact chemical make ups, and dna makeups are never the same. They vary on so many little factors.\n\nThus someone might have the wrong gut flora, and a medicine makes them violently ill that worked on every other person it was tested on. Someone might have the wrong blood make up, and that simply shot gives them hives. But a specific answer to each... just not possible to determine."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
ofyjy | ontology and epistemology | I learned the technical definition for these in a Research Methods class, but I still can't quite grasp them. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ofyjy/ontology_and_epistemology/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3h11ox"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Ontology and epistemology are branches of philosophy. Ontology pertains to the study of existence. It wants to determine what is real, what is reality and what things exist. Epistemology is the study of knowledge. Epistemology wants to know what we know, how we know what we know, and if it's even possible for us to have knowledge. They are two closely related fields of philosophy, along with metaphysics. In this regard, there is a certain tug of war between epistemology and the other two - if we cannot know something, then how can we be sure we know that something exists or that that phenomenon is really what it seems to be. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
cxidqv | what does a ‘stock exchange crash’ actually mean? | For example 1929 - what were the ramifications? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cxidqv/eli5_what_does_a_stock_exchange_crash_actually/ | {
"a_id": [
"eyl9h4a",
"eylaw2j",
"eylht6m"
],
"score": [
39,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A share of stock is just a piece of paper that says you own a tiny piece of a company. You can sell that piece of paper to other people for money. The marketplace where you buy and sell those pieces of paper is a stock exchange (well, it used to be paper- these days it's all done electronically). When lots of people want to sell those papers and no one wants to buy them, the price goes way down. That's a crash. If you are retired and were relying on your ability to sell those papers to get money for rent and food and all the sudden those papers aren't worth very much, suddenly you can't afford rent or groceries.\n\n If all the sudden a large group of people stops being able to pay for things, then the people they normally buy things don't get as much money, so they also start having trouble paying for things. And it just keeps spiraling like that until it impacts people who may have had nothing to do with the stock market.",
"A stock market crash is caused when investors realize that their predictions for the future earnings of companies were too high. Based on the hope of future profits, they set prices which are too high in light of their current understanding of future profits. When nobody will buy a stock at a high price, sellers decide to sell at a lower price. When this is widespread across the market, the market goes down. Then the motion is widespread and large, then you have a correction. The largest corrections are called crashes, though there isn't really anything unusual going on relative to smaller corrections.\n\nThe 1929 crash was caused by a lack of transparency in some parts of the market. Many laws were changed to outlaw some business practices which were unfair to average investors.",
"It means that prices of stocks fall dramatically in a short period of time. Investors hold stock because they believe they will be worth more tomorrow, next month, next year than they are worth today. If prices start to fall, some investors get panicked at their losses and sell, further driving down prices as there are more sellers than buyers. As prices fall, more panic sets in and a vicious cycle develops, as prices keep dropping and that triggering more sellers."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
15tdg0 | why do computer games have to be programmed separately for windows and mac? | Does it have to do something with the OS, or more with the engines the game runs?
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15tdg0/eli5_why_do_computer_games_have_to_be_programmed/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7pmq7w"
],
"score": [
18
],
"text": [
"You know those books at the back of your kindergarten class? Well, they're different from the books at the back of the kindergarten class next door! And you have to base what you read on the books that your class contains, right? Well so do developers! Think of your class as a Mac machine and the class next door as a Windows machine. The book selection is the API (Application programming interface) - basically a set of resources available for developers to use to build their games on the platform. Just like you have to model your reading habits around the book selection in your class, game developers have to model their game around the API, which is different on every OS! Now isn't it past your bedtime?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
cn850k | how is bernie going to pay for all the programs, initiatives, and healthcare reform he pushes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cn850k/eli5_how_is_bernie_going_to_pay_for_all_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"ew7rzzv",
"ew7sbs5"
],
"score": [
10,
2
],
"text": [
"TLDR: taxes\n\nBernie is talking about putting the extra burden of taxation on the upper class and corporations. Corporate taxes especially are pathetically small in the US, Through various loopholes and tax incentives, Major corporations pay hardly anything in taxes while taking advantage of the system. That has to change.\n\nWalmart for example is effectively using welfare programs to subsidize the cost of its workforce. They pay their average workers so little that they need to be on food stamps just to survive, money that is then spent at Walmart, while Walmart barely pays taxes to pay for this benefit. This is what is colloquially referred to as corporate welfare.\n\nThen there's healthcare.\n\nUniversal Healthcare programs, like the one we have here in Canada, is paid for by taxation. **BUT** before you get upset that this will cost Joe-taxpayer a ton of money, you have to recognize that a Universal healthcare system actually saves Joe-taxpayer money.\n\nWith Universal healthcare the cost of insurance drops drastically, as does the cost of procedures. Co-pays and deductibles effectively disappear. So although the cost of implementing a Universal healthcare system is expensive, it's considerably cheaper than maintaining the status quo. So the cost of your benefits will go down more than your taxes will go up.",
"As far as I'm aware, taxes along with trying to reduce spending in other areas.\n\nIn theory the amount people are currently paying to health insurance could be moved to taxes so the net effect is zero or reduced but that will vary widely by individual and by how it turns out to be implemented.\n\nSeveral countries with more social programs tend to have significantly higher taxes. \n\nSomeone who is more familiar with Bernies exact policies would be able to give you a more detailed answer."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2fg6pt | what is gargling? what happens in my body when i gargle say medication or salt water? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fg6pt/eli5_what_is_gargling_what_happens_in_my_body/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck8w2mp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Just individual air bubbles breaching the surface of whatever you're gargling.\n\nPut a straw in a glad of water and blow into the straw, the bubbles that surface is what your throat would look like."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
357fve | why are babies generally considered "cute" and old people are generally considered "ugly" | When you see a baby anything it's usually always "Awwww" but when things get old and wrinkly we think "Ewwww"? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/357fve/eli5_why_are_babies_generally_considered_cute_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr1p3sr",
"cr1pd79",
"cr1pndj"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Babies have large eyes! Babies have large heads! Babies have soft skin! Old people do not. Humans are programmed to find babies cute, so that we didn't kill off our species by throwing them out of the cave when they cried for the first time. \n\nWe have no such programming for the elderly.",
"Humans are programmed to find babies cute.\n\nOld people both remind us of our impending mortality and generally lack the outward traits that we find appealing in potential mates.",
"All mammals are programmed to find certain things cute. Large eyes to head ratios. Large head to body ratios. Overall tininess. Those sorts of things. Because all mammalian babies display these traits, at least in comparison to their adult forms, we have evolved to think those traits are adorable so that we are compelled to protect our young. It's the same reason we find kittens and puppies cute. \n\nWhen it comes to old people, they usually have the opposite of these things. Their head to body ratio is not as wide as a baby's so that's not \"cute.\" While eyes barely grow over our lifetime, our heads do grow so that narrows that ratio. Furthermore, it is not uncommon for the elderly to have hooded eyelids making their eyes appear even smaller.\n\nBeyond that, we find youth attractive. Obviously not babies, but like teens and twenty year olds. Youth signals health and fertility, so we are attracted to that. The farther removed from that you are, the less attractive people will find you. Also, don't forget social components here."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8m689i | is intelligence hereditary? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8m689i/eli5_is_intelligence_hereditary/ | {
"a_id": [
"dzl8u4s",
"dzlc5dk",
"dzletkb",
"dzlfltu",
"dzlu5gv"
],
"score": [
75,
2,
4,
114,
2
],
"text": [
"It definitely is, though researchers have been unable to agree on a number in the nature vs nurture debate. Twins that have been separated at birth tend to end up largely similar in intelligence regardless of upbringing, kids that are adopted at birth are more likely to score around the same as their biological parents, not their adoptive ones. It doesn't matter if it's a 50/50 or 95/5 split, intelligence is definitely hereditary.\n\nI think the idea that intelligence is hereditary should be fairly obvious - people readily agree that pretty much everything about us - height, appearance, predisposition for illness and defects etc - is genetically determined - so why should cognitive function be an exception? The only reason that people who believe in genetics would believe otherwise is because it's a touchy subject.",
"Certainly there is a hereditary component to intelligence, but there are a host of other factors involved. \n\nThe general health of the woman carrying the baby, access to proper nutrition, in some parts of the world environmental components also play a major role.\n\nThere have also been some studies linking IQ reduction to a pregant woman smoking cigarettes during her pregnancy. Studies have also shown cognitive defects due to marijana use by the mother while pregnant.",
"The maximum IQ of a person is mostly determined by genes. However, many things can lower a person's IQ and a few things, beyond healthy diet and exercise, may even increase IQ. Height is often compared to IQ and is a mostly effective comparison, both are very heritable compared to other personal characteristics.\n\nIQ is the broadest form of intelligence that can be reliably measured. It can be thought of as the average speed that a person learns a variety of different things. It is widely recognized that there are other forms of intelligence. These other forms are harder to measure, and heritability is therefore hard to determine. However, IQ is so highly heritable that other forms of intelligence are likely less heritable.",
"This was the spread of data I was once given, from combining tens of thousands of people from different studies. \n\nnew studies may have different numbers, but they are not going to be significantly different:\n\nCorrelation (out of 100%) between different IQ tests\n\nThe same person tested Twice: 87% \nidentical twins reared together: 86% \nIdentical twins reared apart: 76% \nFraternal twins reared together: 55% \nBiological Siblings: 47% \nParents and Children living together: 40% \nParents and children living apart: 31% \nAdopted Children living together: 0% \nUnrelated People Living Apart: 0%\n\nBasically an identical twin with a shared upbringing is indistinguishable from the same person taking multiple tests, in terms of repeat-ability. \n\nRaising twins apart drops the correlation, which suggests that upbringing has *some* sort of effect. \n\nFraternal twins have significantly less correlation than identical twins, meaning that genetics are playing a large role. However, they have a higher correlation than regular siblings. Which means that either sharing a womb has some sort of result (shared conditions of mother while brain developing, or similar external stimulus of epigentic factors), or perhaps having a constant companion of the same age causes some sort of convergence of development. \n \nBiological Siblings are next in line. Not surprising. A big effect, but still a lot of variation. It's notable that siblings correlate more amongst themselves than with their of their parents. The mixed result of the parents genes are playing a role.\n\nAdopted Children living together having 0% correlation contradicts something earlier - that suggests that nurture (alone) has zero influence.\n\n\nGenerally speaking, General Intelligence (normalized for age = IQ) seems to be a lot like height. It is obviously heritable, though there can be variation. Additionally, your genetics seem to outline a particular *potential.* You're not going to get *taller* by doing some sort of workout or eating some particular food or anything like that. You might get *larger*, but you're really not going to increase your height that way.\n\nHowever, if you are *malnourished,* you can certainly end up shorter than your body's 'blueprints' intended. See - the entire population of North Korea.\n\nSo too it goes with intelligence. It seems as though your genetics proscribe a more or less fixed potential. Brain damage, mal-nourishment, or an utter lack of mental stimulation can impede your achievement of this potential, but once you reach a certain minimum of care, you're not going to do anything to push your intelligence *beyond* that. As sad as it may be to say, 'positive' nurturing doesn't seem to have a big effect on IQ. Though negative nurturing is certainly capable of hamstringing it.\n\nThere are various activities, solving mental puzzles and such, that will *temporarily* increase performance on IQ tests. Which isn't that surprising. You practice at something, you get more efficient at doing similar things. But these do not fundamentally alter your brain structure. These are always shown to have diminishing returns. Gifted Learner programs in elementary schools, for instance, are shown to have - among other things - an effect on IQ scores of the kids taking them. But if you test kids' IQs more than a year later in middle school, there is no way to statistically *distinguish* the kids who participated in the program vs a controlled group that did not (based on their IQ scores.)\n\n\nBut to answer your question - yes, very heritable. Which, to an extent, may not be preferable given how much intelligence is a predictor of success in life (obviously.)\n\nBut it should be said it is not the end-all, be-all. Conscientiousness (ie, dedication, focus, hard-work) is right up there with it. And while people vary widely on that, and it is also heritable to a lesser degree, it is a behavior that is far easier to force. You can buckle down and do work in a way that you can't buckle down and just *be smarter.* And that kind of work ethic will often take your further than raw, untempered intelligence.",
"I'll use this analogy:\n\nI think the tools are passed down, but what you use them for is up to you"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
adwjpb | how do we breathe fat out | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/adwjpb/eli5_how_do_we_breathe_fat_out/ | {
"a_id": [
"edkm1qo",
"edkmcv5",
"edkmd0d",
"edkmtoy"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Fat is burned for energy, the burning of fat releases carbon in the form of CO2. CO2 is what you breath out and while it's not a very dense molecule it still has mass and it's that mass that you shed during weight loss.",
"When your muscles need energy they will burn carbohydrates, some of which comes from transforming fat. Burning these carbohydrates produces carbon dioxide and water. You breathe out this carbon dioxide gas as well as water vapor. So all the fat you eat and store will eventually end up being breathed out as carbon dioxide.",
"Fat + oxygen + a bunch of biochemistry that is more ELIundergrad - > water + CO2 + energy \n\nIf you'd like to learn about the \"bunch of biochemistry\" ask someone about ketogenesis, beta-oxidixation, and the citric acid cycle. ",
"Respiration is basically combustion. Carbon hydrogen compounds come into contact with oxygen, energy is added from your body to start the process, the breaking of bonds and reforming of new bonds (making water and carbon dioxide) releases more energy than was needed to make happen, fueling your body. You breathe out both parts in thier gas form, and start the whole process over again."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
62q0nl | can you feel wetness? or are you actually feeling the temperature of wetness? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/62q0nl/eli5_can_you_feel_wetness_or_are_you_actually/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfoh1ix",
"dfohhrd"
],
"score": [
4,
11
],
"text": [
"How do you define wetness? There are water tanks that you float in meant to deprive you of all feeling, yet you can tell difference in humidity in the air even if its at the same temperature.",
"The body cannot feel \"wet\" and compensates by combining pressure and temperature signals. Wetness takes heat away from the body (cold) and the weight of the liquid provides pressure. That's why cold clothes feel damp."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
429jyg | why do we grunt/scream when doing strenuous exercise? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/429jyg/eli5_why_do_we_gruntscream_when_doing_strenuous/ | {
"a_id": [
"cz8plyv"
],
"score": [
17
],
"text": [
"Everybody uses their tummy muscles. But sometimes, when you squeeze really hard while you poop, you squeeze some air out! Same thing if you are lifting heavy ass weights. You're squeezing air out. Even though you are A. Trying to keep it in or B. Go for an extra bit of power by forcing all the air out and really *really* using your abdominals.\n\nEdit: its the same reason that people doing martial arts either yell or do that hissing noise. they are tensing their midsection to help squeeze every bit of power out of their body.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6kx5gm | why are the vid players on some "big" sites so unreliable? | It's gotten to the point where I hesitate to click on any vid not from youtube, simply because the user experience for other sites is so iffy. Vice videos seem to take forever to load on both my (admittedly ancient) laptop and my snazzy new iPhone. CNN, Twitter, ESPN all range from unreliable/slow loading to occasionally actually crashing my computer. Watching videos on Vimeo is absolutely torturous, which is unfortunate because they have a lot of good, exclusive content. These are companies that are focused on video and have a decent amount of funding. What is youtube doing differently that these companies aren't able to do? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6kx5gm/eli5why_are_the_vid_players_on_some_big_sites_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"djpp7bc",
"djpp9yj",
"djprx3d"
],
"score": [
13,
32,
4
],
"text": [
"10 years development and experience, infinite Google money, tech, staff, and servers, directly connected to the majority of the internet advertising revenue network. \n\nEdit: The fact that everyone is using Chrome now, which is also their own product.",
"YouTube processes every single video that is uploaded to the site to use the exact same file type with the exact same settings. This particular file type is heavily compressed. Compressing the video file causes a loss of quality but it loads faster. Vimeo uses a slightly less compressed file type which looks better but might take longer to load if you have a slow internet connection.\n\nThe other things that can affect your viewing experience is the physical location where the video is stored, how many people are trying to access it at once and how capable they are of accommodating the traffic. YouTube has spent a ton of money placing data centers all over the world with enormous bandwidth to accommodate the incredibly high site traffic that they have. So going to YouTube might be like traveling a mile on a six lane highway, and going to CNN might be like going a hundred miles on a winding back country single lane dirt road.",
"youtube has cache server in most ISP (they pay the ISP to house these cache server in) and the rest of the IP TV doesn't have that.\n\nwhat cache server does is that, if a video is very popular in that region, it store it in it's storage so if you are in that region and happen to click it, it downstream to you faster than you go to the google server somewhere 1/2 around the world to fetch the video.\n\nsometime, some video in youtube takes forever to load because it is not popular in your region, hence the video is not stored in your ISP cache.\n\ni work in a ISP, we have google cache servers here. it's not just a single server, it is quite a lot and google is really serious about it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
d69n6m | has parole/probation historically always been a thing or is it a fairly recent idea? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d69n6m/eli5_has_paroleprobation_historically_always_been/ | {
"a_id": [
"f0r67uh",
"f0r8xys"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"The book Les Miserables was published in the 1860s, is set in 1815, and the main character was released from prison on parole. So it at least goes back 200 years.",
"The first mention of probation is 1841, when a man (John Augustus) persuaded a judge to give him custody of an offender to help rehabilitate a drunkard. Prior to this, a judicial reprieve was used in England to suspend the sentence of a criminal if it was known that they were going to be pardoned by the monarch. \n\n\nA year prior, a \"ticket of leave\" system was developed by Alexander Maconichie, which is basically our parole system, where a person earned \"good time\" credits that could be spent to reduce the duration of a sentence."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6h2cvd | why does by bike tire need an inner tube, but car tires don't? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6h2cvd/eli5_why_does_by_bike_tire_need_an_inner_tube_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"diuxy4r",
"div4z5u",
"div52v6",
"div81zt"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
5,
5
],
"text": [
"Car tires did require innertubes in the past, but improvements in manufacturing of both tires and rims have made those needs obsolete.\nCar tires are steel belted, massively improving their inherent strength; bicycle tires are not.",
"Tires provide strength and traction, but it's often expensive to make the interface between the tire and the rim of the wheel air tight. The cheap and simple solution is to have a separate air tight component that is made in a single piece, that is a tube.\n\nCar tires used to use tubes as well, but switched once manufacturing techniques allowed airtight seals between rim and tire to be made relatively cheaply. Bike tires continued to use tubes for much longer, but many higher end bicycles these days are coming with \"tubeless ready\" tires and rims. They often still come with tubes installed from the factory, but can be easily converted to run without tubes.\n\nThe reason cars made this conversion first is because a) car tires are much larger and have a larger contact area between tire and rim making it easier to get a good seal and b) car tires last a long time, often multiple years, while a cyclist might wear out a couple tires in a season of heavy riding.",
"Tubeless tires requires the lip of the tire to have a stiff steel wire. This presses the rim and secures a seal.\n\nTubed tires don't have this so easier to mount and dismount. This means they're cheaper to mold as well as cheaper to install. ",
"Spoked tires require a tube. Can't seal air in a rim full of holes for the spokes to go through. Same goes for motorcycle tires I had on my bike. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4vm33r | who are the evangelicals, what do they believe and why are they not simply called christians? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vm33r/eli5_who_are_the_evangelicals_what_do_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5zhxnw",
"d5zi27h",
"d5zizgh"
],
"score": [
5,
15,
4
],
"text": [
"Mark 16:15 in the King James version says \"Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.\" There are [lots of other translations](_URL_0_) as well. I forget the exact translation we were using in Sunday School, but it went something like \"As you go into the world, tell all who will listen about the gospel.\"\n\nAs a \"regular\" Christian, I believe what I believe and I try to live a life that reflects that. I try to lead by example. If someone wants to visit my church or talk to me about my beliefs, I'm happy to do so. As you go, tell.\n\nAn Evangelical Christian believes that it's his job to convert everyone in the world into his type of Christian. He doesn't just live his life and share his beliefs as he goes. He goes out for the sole purpose of sharing his beliefs. He preaches at you whether you want to listen or not. Go and tell.",
"Evangelical Christians are a subset of Protestant Christians which are themselves a subset of Christianity as a whole. Evangelicals believe it is the responsibility of the Church to spread the word of the Gospel (to \"evangelize\") as far, as much, and as often as possible. The most prominent subset of Evangelicals are the Southern Baptists, one denomination with several million participants worldwide.\n\nEvangelicals tend to be more socially conservative than Christians in general, they tend to vote Republican in America more often because of direct courting on social politics starting in the 1980s. It is said a Republican can't win without the support of Evangelicals though some argument can be made that this demographic is shrinking (aging out, the trend toward liberalness amongst millennials, the diminishing of religiousness nationwide) and therefore should not be catered to as heavily.\n\nWhen you hear about the Bible being used as a defense for why any given group shouldn't be given equal treatment under the law, that use is coming from an Evangelical more often than not.\n\nAs to why they are not called Christians, it's just a matter of getting more specific. You can be an artist, or you can be a sculptor, or you can be a bronze sculptor, or you can be a Neoclassical bronze sculptor.",
"In more recent new media, Evangelicals are being referred to separately from Christianity as a whole in order to define their actions as separate from the religion as a whole.\n\n It's much the same strategy that is being used to separate radical Islamic terrorists, as a subsection of Islam, so that the rest of the people practicing the religion in the nice kind and loving manner can go on with their daily lives without fear of condemnation for having a religion. \n\nFrom the Islamic extremist side the perceived war against Christianity and the West is partially a retaliation to the early conquests of the Catholic Christian Church into the territory in the Middle East. The Catholic Church, however, has a singular point person, the Pope, to represent their religion as a whole. So when conflicting groups want to talk to Catholics, as a whole, they talk to the Pope and his Entourage. \n\nThe rest of the Protestant Christian religions don't have a point person, so they are seen as a singular religion, despite not having ideologically similar philosophies with the other subsections of Protestant Christianity. \n\nTo separate them verbally in the medias and discuss the Evangelicals as a separate extremist entity from the more generally liberal protestant Christians, is great. It allows both conflicting extremist religious groups to be able to discuss their conflicts with each other, instead of forcing their conflicts on people who don't have conflict with the general philosophies. \n\nThis is particularly important in the US as Evangelical Christians are being taught that Islam is evil, despite the fact that Islam and Christianity both stem from a pre-Roman Catholic Church belief system based around the same Prophets. \n\nChristianity and Islam are the same core religion, but the extremists in both are in conflict over a modern interpretation of their religious philosophies. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://biblehub.com/mark/16-15.htm"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
49fwhr | how does the liquids inside our body keep flowing in space? wouldn't it technically just amass into a big blob? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49fwhr/eli5_how_does_the_liquids_inside_our_body_keep/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0rhlib"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Your heart is basically a pump to push the blood through your blood vessels. Gravity is not required. I don't know what you're picturing with the big blob."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
219uc8 | why can social security "run out" whereas programs like welfare cannot? | I have checked the searches and haven't been able to find this question -
Why is it that Social Security can "run out" when programs like Welfare still receive funding? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/219uc8/eli5_why_can_social_security_run_out_whereas/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgazgji",
"cgb03tv",
"cgb0gpp"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
4
],
"text": [
"Social security funds come from a very specific tax. Welfare and other entitlement programs are part of the general fund. Check your last pay stub -- there will be a line for FICA taxes and a line for Social Security taxes.\n\nThey can both run out if the tax money stops coming in, but Social Security works on the (incorrect) principle that there will always be more people paying into it than taking from it.",
"Social Security itself cannot run out. The common misconception is that Social Security is deposited into some big account that will eventually run out. This is not true.\n\nBasically think of Social Security like a business:\n\nYou have the Social Security tax, which is revenue. Then there are people being paid social security, which is an expense.\n\nSince Social Security's conception, there has always been a surplus (where the government takes in more taxes than pays out benefits). This surplus goes to an account called \"Social Security Surplus\". ~~The money in the Surplus Account is used to pay down the national debt.~~\n\nThe problem that politicians refer to, however, is that with the entirety of the Baby Boomers (the largest segment of the U.S. Population) about to retire in the next decade, for the first time in U.S. history there is going to be a Social Security deficit. This is fine for the first year, but when people retire between 55 and 65 generally, we can reasonably expect that they will live another 20-30 years assuming they are healthy in most regards.\n\nThe dilemma with this is that the expense will continue to grow, but due to the Recession and unemployment rates, fewer people are paying into Social Security, so less revenue is actually being taken in. \n\nSo while the government might be able to foot the bill for awhile, and the Baby Boomers might be ok with their retirement, there will most certainly not be enough money to cover Generations X and Y when they retire in 30-50 years.\n\nTo answer the other part of your question, welfare is exclusively an expense, with no specific revenue to counteract it. The government actually makes profit off of Social Security, so it's a huge deal when that goes away. In addition, people are naturally selfish (not insulting anyone, that's just part of being human), so the idea that we may not be able to retire as comfortably as we expected (good lord man, don't tell me we have to *save our money?!?!?!*) and that all the money we've paid into Social Security since we were 16 is going to be wasted kind of ticks us off.\n\n\n\n*If my answer was unsatisfactory, [Khan Academy](_URL_0_) does an excellent explanation on this subject.*\n\n\n**EDIT:** Corrected misinformation about the uses of the Social Security Trust account ",
"\"Running out\" is a bit misleading. Most people will get money pulled each paycheck to go towards Social Security, so assuming the system doesn't change, there will always be something to pay out to retirees.\n\nWhat can run out, though, is the Social Security Trust Fund. For a while now, Social Security has taken in more money than its paid out, and the excess has been put into the Trust Fund. We're hitting the point, though, where the money coming in from Social Security taxes is less than what's being paid out, which is what the Trust Fund is for, to make up the difference. The way it's looking, eventually the Trust Fund will be used up, so there won't be anything to cover the shortfall. But again, there will still be money coming in, so Social Security will still pay out something, just not as much as promised.\n\nUnless, of course, the system gets changed to prevent that. It's happened before, and old people vote."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/american-civics-subject/american-civics/v/social-security-intro"
],
[]
] |
|
4jiibc | how do they know who certain demographics vote for in elections? | I'm from the UK and I'm not 100% sure how American elections work- how do the media know which candidates certain demographics vote for? I'm referring to stuff like reporting who got x% of the "black vote" and the "female vote" etc. If the vote is completely anonymous then how do they know which groups voted for which candidates? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4jiibc/eli5_how_do_they_know_who_certain_demographics/ | {
"a_id": [
"d36urow",
"d36ut8m"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Opinion polling. People are asked in other, privately run surveys (polls). The data you see isn't from the actual vote itself, but from these other polls. \n\nWe do the same sort of thing here in the UK, you just hear less about it as our elections operate differently.",
"Exit polls.\n\nPeople stand outside polling places and ask people questions after they vote. They get demographic information, as well as information like who they voted for, what their main issues are, and so on.\n\nVoters can decline to participate but the exit polls seem to be pretty accurate nonetheless."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
45sl3i | how does reddit give you a different frontpage while keeping the same url? | If you click the link: [_URL_0_,](_URL_0_) you will be directed to the frontpage, yet everyone who clicks it has a different frontpage. How does Reddit display these different pages without changing the url? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/45sl3i/eli5_how_does_reddit_give_you_a_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"czzuqp8",
"czzuqpw"
],
"score": [
3,
4
],
"text": [
"When your browser goes to a url, your browser sends a GET request to the server. The server can then decide what to send back. The server can get your account from a few different places, cookies, session data, etc. It uses that information to get account information from their database, then it does some processing and sends back a customized front page.",
"There's no .html file for the front page. Instead, the content of the page is generated on-the-fly by the webserver, based on who you're logged in as."
]
} | [] | [
"reddit.com"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2erq51 | what do the letters & numbers in front of fighter jet names mean and how do they come up with that system? | For instance F-14, doesn't mean the '14th' 'Fighter' a company has made. The F-2 is a Japanese plane and was made after the American F-4 Phantom. So confusing! I know the letters that come after the jet name e.g. F-14'D' signify variant or designation to a particular task. Another mind crushingly confusing example is the F-14 and the F-117 designations. There are not 103 models of aircraft between the two.... Or are there? (0 0 )
I did research for a few hours, Google and Duckduckgo did not provide answers. I asked a couple friends from the navy that can tell me a lot of things about aircraft, but not the letter/number naming system; no luck. I have no friends at Boeing or Sukhoi.
Help? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2erq51/eli5_what_do_the_letters_numbers_in_front_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck2b4y6",
"ck2bal3",
"ck2dfev"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"When I was a kid building airplane models, there were standard designations for the different functions:\n\nF - fighter\nA - attack bomber (quicker and smaller payloads than bombers)\nB - bomber\nP - pursuit (not sure how they differed from fighters)\nC - Cargo\nH - Helicopter\n\n Those were for Army Air Force and after the split, Air Force. I think the Navy had some different ones, like maybe P for pontoon boats.\nThe numbers were assigned by the government to the manufacturers in sequence. If the military wanted a new fighter, it would issue specs. Any company that wanted to compete for the contract would be assigned a unique number. Only the winning design would go into production which accounts for why there are skips in the numbering sequence of the planes that actually become part of the active inventory. \n\nModern practices may be different.\n",
"Currently, there's a system in use with all branches of the US military:\n\n_URL_0_\n\nPrior to 1962, there were different systems:\n\n_URL_2_\n\nIn either case, there's always exceptions & variations. [The F-117 is one of them](_URL_1_) - not fitting either it's designated role (being a ground-attack aircraft) nor any known sequence.",
"Any given system really only applies within one country. That's why the JP F-2 came after the US F-4.\n\nI really only know the US system, so here's a basic intro.\n\nThe first letter or letters is the mission. F for fighter, A for ground attack (small bombs and guns), B for bomber, C for cargo, H for helicopter, M for multirole (mostly utility helos), R for reconaissance, Q for drone, V for VIP transport, T for training, P for Patrol (maritime use, mainly anti-submarine). These can be joined, as in the MH-60 Blackhawk multirole helicopter, or the RQ-170 Sentinel recon drone. Since you said fighters, we'll stick to F and A.\n\nAlso, it used to be a bit different. Around WWII, for example, P stood for Pursuit for the US Army Air Corps, and was the same role as what we'd call a fighter, but the Navy used F for fighter. And the numbers tend to jump around - they tend to be sequential these days but the 50s-80s the numbering doesn't make much sense to me. \n\nA lot of the differences in sequence are from experimental aircraft, test aircraft that didn't make it to production, or foreign aircraft given a US designation. As an example, there was an F-111 Aardvark, then 112-116 were used for captured Soviet aircraft brought in for testing, and then you have the F-117. \n\nIn the current sequence, you have F-1 through F-11 being production fighters. The F-12 was a proposed variant of the A-12, which was the concept craft for the SR-71 Blackbird. F-13 was skipped for some reason, possibly due to the \"unluckiness.\" Then you have the F-14 through F-16 as production craft.\n\nThe F-16 was followed by the YF-17, a concept aircraft that evolved into the F/A-18. F-19 disappeared but there's a persistent rumor it was an unacknowledged and highly classified stealth aircraft. Then there was the F-20 Tigershark, which was cancelled. The F-21 Kfir was an Israeli-built aircraft used as an aggressor aircraft in training. Then you had the YF-22 and -23, the Lockheed and Boeing concept craft for the Advanced Tactical Fighter. The YF-22 became the F-22. Then for some reason, the next ones were the YF-32 and -35, of which the latter was chosen for the Joint Strike Fighter.\n\nFinally, the letter after the number designates a variant. Take the F/A-18. The F/A-18 A and B were the single and dual-seat original variants (the second seat is for a Naval Flight Officer, who navigates, operates weapons, and monitors radar). The C and D variants were single- and dual-seat upgrades. E and F are single- and dual-seat Super Hornets which, while maintaining a very similar shape and mission, are much bigger and have upgraded avionics, engines, etc. Then there's the E/A-18G Growler, which is an electronic attack aircraft on the same frame. It's used for radar jamming and attacking radar sites.\n\nNote the F/A-18 having the slash. It's meant to demonstrate that it was designed from the ground up as a dual-role strike and fighter aircraft, rather than a repurposed fighter like the F-15E Strike Eagle. Repurposed aircraft often just put the letters together: the AC-130 is an attack gunship based on the C-130 Hercules cargo plane platform."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1962_United_States_Tri-Service_aircraft_designation_system",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F117#Designation",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_aircraft_designation_systems"
],
[]
] |
|
841for | why do so many women seem to crave pickles when they're pregnant? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/841for/eli5_why_do_so_many_women_seem_to_crave_pickles/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvm4tao"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"As a pregnant woman, I can say that hydration requirements are much higher than normal - I need to drink a lot more than usual. Our blood volume is increased and the baby also requires fluids. We drink and pee more, but urinating also flushes out more than just water and body wastes - we need additional electrolytes. If I don't get enough, drinking water doesn't quench my thirst and I feel ill. So, pretty sure pickles are craved by pregnant women for their increased need of salts (electrolytes)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3dbk38 | when does the presumption of innocence not apply? | In United States law, in what cases does the presumption of innocence NOT apply?
I was watching the show Hot Bench and the judges mentioned that when someone is accused of child abuse, the presumption of innocence doesn't apply. Why is that? And in what other cases does it not apply? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3dbk38/eli5_when_does_the_presumption_of_innocence_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct3lafm"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In that instance, it's to protect the wife/husband/and or child from further contact. But it does not abrogate his right to a fair and impartial jury and the judge's instructions that presumption of innocence is expected until the jury retires. I know of no other instance of this."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1sd83a | while my hand is curled into a fist, why is it so hard to raise my ring finger compared to other fingers? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sd83a/eli5_while_my_hand_is_curled_into_a_fist_why_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdwe2tg",
"cdwf77v",
"cdwfbfx",
"cdwfitd",
"cdwg1nj",
"cdwgxb8",
"cdwh74w",
"cdwh7pm",
"cdwhcit",
"cdwhs90",
"cdwi90k",
"cdwid77",
"cdwilr3",
"cdwj5x6",
"cdwj8jj",
"cdwjlu2",
"cdwkz2z",
"cdwo6nu",
"cdwqh5w",
"cdwslsl",
"cdwst9x",
"cdwt2rv",
"cdwwy7w"
],
"score": [
1124,
24,
52,
9,
12,
3,
6,
2,
14,
7,
2,
3,
8,
4,
29,
3,
4,
3,
4,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The tendons in your fingers are independent from one another apart from the ones in your middle and ring finger. These tendons are connected, so that when your middle finger is folded down you cannot move your ring finger. It feels like your ring finger is stuck",
"It has to do with the tendons that control the fingers. The tendons attached to your ring finger are typically bridged with your middle finger and pinky. \n\nThis typically isn't a problem as the ring finger isn't used independently of the other fingers, except for typing or another similar activity (playing piano).\n\nAs others have stated, you can improve the dexterity with finger exercises.",
"The nerves and tendons that control the fingers are the cause of this problem. Your thumb, index finger, and pinkie all have their own individual cords, but your ring finger's is attached to your middle finger's, like the tributary of a river, and as a result, the position of the ring finger is directly associated with the position of the middle finger. This sketch explains the layout _URL_0_",
"It's difficult to extend your ring finger from a fist, but impossible to raise it if you place your hand on a table as pictured at _URL_0_",
"It is has to do with the number and distribution of the muscles responsible for extending your fingers. Here's a drawing *of the back of your hand to help.\n_URL_0_\nAll of your fingers have multiple extensor muscles except for the ring finger, it has to share an extensor muscle that also extends all the fingers. So to just extend your ring finger requires activation of only part of that muscle. This is also why your ring finger is the weakest finger in your hand.\n*edit clarified diagram orientation.",
"I had little problem moving my ring finger, but the range of motion was perceptibly small in comparison. (We already know it's kind of a useless finger anyway) However, are guitarists at an advantage here? I had to use relatively little effort to actually achieve any movement, it was even more-so with my fretting (left) hand. ",
"Different nerves bend different fingers.\nThe Median nerve bends fingers 1 (thumb), 2,3 and half of 4 (ring finger)\nThe Ulnar nerve bends the ring finger and pinky.\nSo, its very difficult to raise the ring finger independently, if other fingers are closed, since it is attached to both nerves involved in finger flexion.",
"Okay, so, similar but related question. I can raise my ring finger fairly easily. However, and this is only on my right hand, I can't lower my pinky finger without lowering my ring finger. Whenever I try to lower my pinky on its own, the ring finger bends at the middle. Strangely enough, I can lower my ring finger completely without lowering my pinky. What the hell does that mean lol",
"Most of these answers are close (they are saying that the tendons to the ring and middle fingers are the only ones not independent of one another). But this doesn't explain why it is easier to lift your middle finger from a fist than your ring finger. There are 3 muscles in the forearm we are concerned with. One has tendons going to the middle finger and pointer finger. Another has one tendons going to the pointer through the pinkey. And the last only has a tendon at the pinky. As you can see the only one that goes to the ring finger is this middle one.\n\nSo you have no choice of which muscle to use when extending this finger, and thus it is easier to extend it if the other 3 fingers are extended (with more emphasis on the ring finger and pinky as they are closer). When extending the middle finger, however, you can use the other muscle, thus making it easier to extend even if the ring finger is not extended. Hope this makes sense.",
"(not an answer, but relevant)\n\nBend your middle finger down to touch your palm. \n\nNow put your hand on a flat surface with the first knuckle of your middle finger touching the table along with all of your fingertips. \n\nNow try to lift each finger individually. \n\nThe rind finger is nearly impossible to lift. \n\nFor an answer to this question, I think /u/HowManyLettersCanFi has one of the best. ",
"To expand on OP's question, why the hell can I raise my ring finger in my left hand when my fist is clenched? Full disclosure, I broke it (hairline fracture) several years ago and cannot do this at all with my right hand.",
"You can't tell someone: fuck off, good job, bad job or ask for a billion dollars with your ring finger... You can only ask them to marry you, that's boring. ",
"When I was a kid I thought I was the only one. I got so furious with my ring finger I would start training hard by forcefully keeping it up while the others curled. I knew it was gonna be a time consuming process, but I pushed myself.\n\nI gave up 20 minutes later.",
"Strange, I can lift the ring finger on my right hand but not on my left. ",
"The extensor tendons to your middle, ring and little fingers are attached to each other (see [here](_URL_0_)). They are connected by \"intertendinous ligaments\" that go from just before your knuckes on the middle and little fingers' tendons to a point closer to the wrist on the ring finger.\n\nThis \"V\" shape is what causes the difference in which fingers you can extend: when the ring finger is curled up the ligaments connecting it to the middle and little fingers are still lax and so you can still extend those two fingers freely. When you curl the middle or little fingers though, it pulls the ring finger extensor tendon forwards meaning that even though you tense the muscle that would normally extend it, the tendon is too slack to create any pull and so the finger won't extend. (You may be able to see the ring finger tendon move on the back of your hand as you try to lift the ring finger up).\n\nThe index finger has its own tendon and so you can extend it even when the rest of your hand is making a tight fist.",
"It should be easier to move your fingers independently on your dominant hand and if you've played an instrument for a long time. Basically, the more you use your fingers, the more muscles develop, the more independent each can be. \n \nI can move all my fingers independently except for my ring finger, though fractionally. Played piano for 13 years.\n \nThank you Czerny.",
"If you curl your fist and use your opposite hand you can move your ring finger around all you want.\n\nThe reason is that you have separate muscles to extend your index and pinky fingers. You only have one common muscle for the ring and middle fingers. So you can only extend them together, but the range of motion is not limited by a \"tendon.\"",
"The phenomenon that makes differential finger movements very difficult is called the enslaving effect. There is a substantial amount of fascia and connective tissue that cause tendons to be affected by movement (or lack there of) of other nearby tendons. \n\nTry this! With an open hand, flex your ring finer towards your wrist without bending at the wrist. You should notice that your middle finger and pinky will move towards each other. It is very difficult to isolate movement in just the ring finger. \n\nIf interested, here is an academic source that discusses the enslaving effect. \n\n_URL_0_",
"All four fingers actually have one muscle/tendon to lift them all (its called your extensor digitorum). Lucky for your pinky and pointer they each have a second muscle and tendon (extensor digiti minimi and extensor indicis) so they can act independently. This is why you can make a \"[hook 'em](_URL_0_)\" sign much better than that [dane cook hand sign thing](_URL_1_). Notice how the pointer and pinky are bent at the second knuckle in the dane cook sign, but the middle finger and ring finger are completely down in the hook 'em sign.",
"Was going to try this but then remembered I can't make a fist. ",
"When wiggling your fingers, look up at your forearm near your elbow. See where your skin is rippling? This is where the muscles are that control your fingers. Not all of your fingers have their own muscles due to space, so the middle and ring finger share a muscle, hence the difficulties.",
"The muscles that allow you to extend you fingers (move them from a closed fist to an open palm) are located in your forearm (on the posterior side, which is the top of your forearm if your palm is flat on a desk). The tendons from these muscles connect to the bones of our fingers and control them. There is one muscle that extends all four fingers (index to pinky) called extensor digitorum - this is the only muscle that the ring and middle finger are controlled by. If all your fingers are folded into a fist it's hard to raise your ring finger since the tendons of your index, middle, ring, and pinky fingers are all connected to only one muscle. The index finger and the pinky finger both have their own separate muscle in addition to extensor digitorum, so it's easy to move them. ",
"I broke my ring finger on my right hand in the palm and had to have it all pinned back up. I have had about 50% use of that hand since. Any other finger and I would have been good to go. It's been horrible. Both the ring finger and middle finger don't bend all the way down and I can't make a fist. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://sketchtoy.com/56912520"
],
[
"http://www.sciencemadesimple.co.uk/activities/paralysed_finger"
],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/QOsaVWh.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/Extensor_digitorum_muscle.png"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167945713000092"
],
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ca/Hook_em_Horns_in_the_2005_Big_12_college_football_championship_game.JPG/400px-Hook_em_Horns_in_the_2005_Big_12_college_football_championship_game.JPG",
"http://th05.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/f/2010/024/3/8/Dane_Cook_Hand_Sign_by_olester13.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
cyosup | how is hurricane dorian on course perfectly up the coast line? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cyosup/eli5_how_is_hurricane_dorian_on_course_perfectly/ | {
"a_id": [
"eyt9u6e"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"As hurricanes pass over land the winds slow down which can mean that the line they move along \"forces\" them to track along a coastline rather than across a coastline if they were generally heading in that direction."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
70ezon | the math behind interstellar's time traveling | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/70ezon/eli5_the_math_behind_interstellars_time_traveling/ | {
"a_id": [
"dn2pyp3"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Firstly, Interstellar is a film and isn't perfect. So don't get worked up on the ending. \n\nAnyway, go back in time to around the 19th century and a dude named Maxwell. Maxwell realized that a certain branch of mathematics that had been previously applied to heating and cooling also applied to electricity, and used that math to derive a few equations that could be used to model the change of electric fields. \n\nAt the time, one of the unanswered questions related to Maxwell's Equations was that they implied the speed of light in a vacuum was constant. This doesn't make any sense in classical physics. According to Newton's mechanics, if you lit a flashlight while standing still, the light would travel at speed *c*. If you were on a train and travelled at a speed *v* then lit the flashlight, the light should travel at speed *c* + *v*. Maxwells' equations essentially implied that if the train was traveling in a vacuum, the light would still travel at speed *c*. This is counterintuitive, and doesn't make much sense. \n\nEnter Einstein, who in a thought experiment assumed that light travels at a speed of *c* in a vacuum, and the train still travels at speed *v*. So what else must change? The only answer was time. That is, if speed is the change in distance over change in time, for the speed of light to be constant in a vacuum, as you travel faster on the train, time must slow down. \n\nAs it happens, this winds up explaining a whole host of strange things that had previously been explained by nothing more than error in calculations. \n\nEnter gravity. In every instance that you experience it, gravity is felt as an acceleration, or change in velocity, with some relation to mass. Bigger mass, more acceleration. With regards to Einstein's theories of Relativity, which mathematically explained the change of time with regard to velocity, essentially in the presence of a larger mass, and thus a bigger gravitational field and larger acceleration, time must move slower. It turns out that this is necessary for things like GPS satellites, which need to compensate for the lower gravity and faster passage of time to compute the location of a point on earth at a higher gravity. \n\nIn the film Interstellar, this is what happens when they get close to a black hole. In the presence of much higher gravity, time slows down. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5433pz | why do people say if the bees go away, we will all die? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5433pz/eli5_why_do_people_say_if_the_bees_go_away_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7yhtpp",
"d7yhxnp",
"d7yiclw",
"d7yicun",
"d7z0ln0"
],
"score": [
3,
15,
3,
16,
2
],
"text": [
"Bees are one of the major pollinators of plants if plants don't get pollinators to pollinate them large amount of our food crops won't grow so we may starve. ",
"Because a very large percentage of plants depend on bees to pollinate them.\n\nMost of our crops would fail, and even if we had a system for artificially pollinating them, the rest of the ecosystem would be rather screwed anyway. You can't have mass extinctions of the majority of flowering plants in the world and expect things to keep just ticking over...",
"They're talking about pollination, the process where the pollen (basically plant sperm) makes its way to the ovum. Even though some plants rely on other means of transportation for their pollen, some are airborne, waterborne, do self-pollination, rely on other animals (like [hummingbirds](_URL_0_), [bats](_URL_1_), [flies](_URL_4_), [geckos](_URL_3_), and many more), most of those plants are wild species that don't have many economical importance.\n\nThe plants that do have economical importance can be divided in two main groups: (i) cereals that are either self-pollinating or airborne and (ii) all the other plants that are mostly bee-pollinated. In particular, we're talking about the [honey bee](_URL_2_), which is wildly widespread around the world and isn't specialized to a single plant.\n\nHoney bees take care of the job of pollinating flowers wherever there are flowers to pollinate. A great advantage is that they have a somewhat \"random\" pattern, which maximizes the genetic diversity of the plants, which is great for a farmer that wants strong, durable, tasty plants/fruits/flowers/vegetables. If you take the bees away, all the benefits are immediately gone. The farms will have a hard time producing any plants for human consumption (except for cereals). \n\nThe main factors affecting bees are (i) rapid climate change and (ii) use of hazardous inorganic pesticides.\n\nPeople say that \"we will all die\" but that is unlikely, if you reduce the resources, the only implication is that mankind will reduce its population. What would wipe out humanity would be the implications of less food resources: Struggle for existence, uproar, riots, even wars.",
"A huge huge *huge* number of flowering plants rely on bees to reproduce. *All* flowering plants rely on symbiotic relationships with some kind of pollinator - that's the purpose of the flower. It attracts an animal with bright colors and promises of free calories as nectar. When the animal drinks the nectar, it picks up pollen from the flower and carries it to the next. This is way more efficient than what, say, conifers like pines do, which is to dump an ass-ton of pollen into the air and hope some of it gets into the cones of the next tree over.\n\nMany flowering plants have evolved for millions of years alongside specific creatures that they need for pollination. The last thing the plant wants is for an insect to land on its flower and then wander off onto a random other species of plant - the plant needs the pollinator to go between plants of the same species. To ensure this, the flower might use specific colors on its flower to attract the *one* insect species or genus that looks for that color. That *one* species or genus has evolved with that plant and knows it will get the best meal from that one kind of flower. Or the flower has evolved a deeper recess that holds the nectar, which the pollinator can only reach with a longer tongue; or it's got a tiny hole that only the right-sized insect can fit through. The pollinators evolved to have a longer tongue or the right sized body, but not both.\n\nAll this is to say that many plants need bees because literally no other animal is capable of carrying that plant's pollen. No bees means those species will like die out very quickly. \"So what? I don't even like almonds! We'll just replace those flowering trees with different trees that don't need bees,\" is something you might say. But the problem is, the [list of crop plants pollinated by bees is pretty damn long](_URL_0_). So...that's a bit of a problem. And those are just the plants we need for food. There are a lot of other plants we don't use for food but still would appreciate having around.\n\nWill we all die? No, probably not. Will a *lot* of people die? Yeah, almost certainly. There are still food crops like wheat that don't require bees, but a lot of people, especially in places where wheat does not grow well, rely on plants, especially fruits, that needs bees. There's also a lot of industry that relies on those plants, which would crash, which would leave a lot of people without money to pay for the increasingly expensive food.",
"Do you remember the older way parents explained \"the birds and the bees\" to your children when they asked how they were made? This topic of the birds and the bees showed a direct relationship to reproduction. Without them floral can not populate.\n\nA plant does not move. It can not reach out and pollinate and it uses bees to carry its pollen to another plant. Thus seeds are now made. Since a plant can not move, when it comes time to drop the seeds they would all land right next to the plant and the seed would challenge its parent for resources. Thus the seed trying to grow will die because it doesn't have enough strength or space to take what it wants. The birds are used to move these seeds further than the seeds parent position. This insures plants grow.\n\nOf course there are other factors and creastures that also can do this (squirrels) but they are not always as efficient. \n\nRemove the bees from the equation and far less pollination goes on. No pollination and there are no seeds to be made. All this will derail the whole train of ecology beginning at the very source."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://bybio.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/ruby-throated-hummingbird-on-cardinal-flower-3.jpg",
"https://beeinformed.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/20070806_bat.jpg",
"http://www.commanster.eu/commanster/Insects/Bees/SpBees/Apis.mellifera.jpg",
"https://www.nwf.org/~/media/Content/NWM/Animals/Reptiles-Amphibians/gecko-ornate-day-Mark-Moffett-570x375.ashx",
"http://en.es-static.us/upl/2011/03/Fly_with_pollen_Satyrium_pumilum.jpeg"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_crop_plants_pollinated_by_bees"
],
[]
] |
||
1c8ksg | how can the military shoot nuclear missiles out of the air without them exploding at some point? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1c8ksg/eli5_how_can_the_military_shoot_nuclear_missiles/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9e302i",
"c9e3odc",
"c9ea28v"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"For a nuclear bomb to truly explode, it requires that the fissile material be *smashed* into itself. This can be done one of two ways.\n\n1)Lump A is \"shot\" down a chamber within the bomb into Lump B. Boom!\n\n2)A lump has bombs rigged all the way around it that go off at once causing it to implode. boom!\n\nHow it **can't** happen is a random explosion from the side blowing it to pieces. Sure there would be radiation. Sure there would be some nuclear activity. But nothing nothing nothing compared to a properly discharged nuclear device.",
"nuclear warheads aren't like high explosive warheads. they won't be detonated by a random shock. it requires a specific and precise triggering mechanism to set off the nuclear chain reaction, a random shock (like getting hit by an explosion) will break the fission core into pieces without causing a nuclear chain reaction.",
"Nuke warheads don't arm until terminal phase (when it's close to the ground ready to strike on the way down). This is to avoid accidents,misfires, and because you only want the electronics running for a very short time in case they malfunction. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7jrf2y | - why do computer memory systems use 1024 not 1000? | Is it something to do with Base 8 Numbers (8/64/1024) not Base 10 (10/100/1000)?
Also why is it 1024MB to 1GB, but 1000GB to 1TB? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7jrf2y/eli5_why_do_computer_memory_systems_use_1024_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"dr8k3j4",
"dr8mm80",
"dr8rdje",
"dr8s43r",
"dr8vpnu",
"dr8wk0m",
"dr8x6e4",
"dr8ymev",
"dr8zsv6",
"dr93rpp"
],
"score": [
254,
84,
62,
21,
5,
2,
17,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > Is it something to do with Base 8 Numbers (8/64/1024) not Base 10 (10/100/1000)?\n\nAlmost there. Computers don't use base 8 they use binary, ones or zeroes. It is (2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512,1024) as you increase in binary digit places. ",
"1024 is a nice round number in binary. It's 10000000000. So for many purposes it's easier to take 1024 bytes as a unit than 1000.\n\nThere are different definitions of units like KB, MB, GB and so on. Hard disk manufacturers in particular take 1GB to be exactly 1000MB instead of 1024.\n\nSupposedly 1024MB is actually one Gi*bi*byte, but barely anyone calls it that. Most people would call it a gigabyte.",
"To expend on what has already been said. Imagine a small box where you can store a 0 or a 1. That’s a bit. Now imagine that you have 2 of them side by side. To control in which one you’re going to read/write you put a switch before them. If the switch is in one position, the bit goes in one of this box, and if it’s in the other position it goes in the other box. Now imagine that you want 3 boxes instead of two. If you have only one switch that’s not going to cut it. The switch can decide only between 2 positions. So you need one more switch. But if you put 2 switches then you can decide between 4 positions and not just 3. Putting only 3 boxes is then kind of wasteful when with the same circuit you can put 4 of them.\n\nNow use the same logic with very big numbers and you’ll understand why everything is base 2 with semi-conductors. \n",
"A bit is the smallest possible piece of information I can query. It can be in two states: 0 or 1; on or off; up or down; etc\n\nSo one bit gives me two possible states. If I have two bits then I have 4 possible states: 00, 01, 10 and 11. \n\nSo if I have n bits I can have 2^n possible states. \n\nThe other comments go from here. ",
"Binary. Computer switch is on or off, electricity going through or not going through. Binary is powers of 2, 2/4/8/16/32/64/128/256/512/1024/2048/4096. That's why those numbers sound familiar even if you suck with computers, that's what every memory card, phone storage, computer storage comes in.",
"A) It's to do with binary. If you have 10 binary switches (bits), you can represent 1024 different numbers. And the fact that it's 10 bits, and the result isn't very far from 1000, is pretty much why people latched on to it.\n\nAlthough you're not far wrong; you can regard binary numbers as being base 8 (\"octal\"), if you take the switches in clusters of 3. The first computer I ever used was programmed in octal. And it's pretty much standard in much of the mainframe world to think of the bits in clusters of 4, which effectively gives you base 16 (\"hexadecimal\").\n\nB) Blame marketing. Defining 1024 lots of 1024 bytes (1024 kilobytes, in other words) as a megabyte was pretty much established by techies, who cared about accuracy, before computers and their peripherals became mere commodities. Whereas once you're selling to people who don't know better, calling 1000GB a Terabyte lets you inflate your marketing boasts.",
"There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.",
"Computers only understand two things.\n\n* \"On\" and \"Off\"\n* 1 and 0\n\nSo using this they don't count 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9.\n\nThey count 0,1\n\nSo how do they express 2? The same way we express 10. Add another digit.\n\nSo a computer counts like this:\n\n* 0 - 0\n* 1 - 1\n* 10 -2 \n* 11 -3\n* 100 - 4\n* 101 - 5\n* 110 -6\n* 111 - 7\n\nNow as a side effect of this, 1000 is not a nice round number to them like it is to us. Using 1000 would be wasteful.\n\n* 1,000 = 1111101000\n* 1023 = 1111111111 - See how **every** bit is used?\n\nNow wait a second Sergei, I thought you said 1024? Why only 1023?\n\nWell computers don't start at 1. They start at 0. So there are 1024 different values. 1-1023 + the 0 value for a total of 1024.\n",
"When counting things that by their nature only occur in powers of 2, 1024 is close enough to 1000 to just refer to it as \"1k\". 1k is exactly 1000, has been since the word \"kilo\" was invented, but everyone dealing with that stuff would know that exactly 1000 was unlikely and that it would probably be the closest power of 2 instead. That works well up to around 32k. 32768 is closer to 33000 than to 32000, and 65536 is already larger than 65000, but still referred to as 64k because it would just seem weird to jump to 33k or 65k. So a convention was born where 1024 was no longer \"about 1k\", but \"1k\", when dealing with things that are usually powers of 2. While no formal standard recognizes this, it becomes common in computer parlance to define kilo-, Mega- and Gigabytes like that.\n\nMeanwhile, other professions are getting concerned about bytes. Disk and tape drives store data sequentially, so there is absolutely no reason to use a power of 2. Communication links transmit a given number of bits in a certain time frame. Time can be arbitrarily divided, again no need for a power of 2. The standard for literally everything is that k means 1000, so that is what they go with. Besides, if you want to sell how much of something you can offer, you get the more flattering numbers from that convention, too.\n\nNow, OS vendors on the other hand think from a file system perspective. If we store the amount of bytes in 32 bits, how much space will there be in total? 2^32, or 4 binary Gbytes. That is almost 4.3 decimal ones, but who cares about decimal?\n\nTurns out customers got confused because their 2 GB drive only shows up as 1.86 GB. People blame greedy drive manufacturers.\n\nThe confusion finally reaches a standardising body. The IEC does not want to muddy the definition of kilos, Megas and Gigas, so they introduce a new set of prefices for their binary equivalents: kibi, Mebi and Gibi finally formalize the discrepancy between powers of 2 and powers of 10. There was much rejoicing by techies, and you can often find GiBs on systems used primarily by the technologically literate, like GNU/Linux. What about more mainstream systems?\n\n\"We are not going to introduce that extra 'i'. We do not want to confuse the customers.\" - \"But is the discrepancy not more confusing than that?\" - \"Technically yes, but they will just blame drive makers.\"\n\nThe end.",
"Not an answer, but if you play the mobile game 2048, it will start making a lot of sense to you :)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
21mbnu | what's the difference between "stereo" and "dolby 5.1"? | Hello guys & gals! I see options for different sound settings like this on lots of things but I never know which one is better/what the difference is. I have pretty decent speakers but I don't know how to make the most of them. Anyone feel like helping out?
Edit : Wow, you guys act fast. Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21mbnu/eli5whats_the_difference_between_stereo_and_dolby/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgeexro",
"cgeez1t",
"cgef2qh",
"cgepr35",
"cgerihg"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Stereo tends to be either 2.1, or 2 channel, which means it sends signal to 2 speakers, and a sub woofer (which is the .1). 5.1 thusly means it sends signal to 5 speakers and a sub, so this option is best if you have a surround sound setup. ",
"Stereo is for if you just have 2 speakers, left and right. 5.1 is for if you have 5 speakers and a subwoofer. Usually left, right, center, rear left, rear right and the subwoofer.",
"Stereo \n\n- designed for two speakers... it makes things sound like they are on the left or on the right.. if you have more than 2 speakers and you correctly connected them to the right and left inputs it STILL sounds like it is on the left or on the right...\n\n5.1 \n\n- designed for 5 speakers and a subwoofer\n- Outputs are front left center, front right, rear left, rear right and subwoofer\n- your speakers need to be placed arround your room as described by their name, with the center under the TV and the front and rear ones respectivly in front or behind where you sit.\n- the subwoofers location doesn't matter as much\n- what you get from this is sounds can appear to be behind you or circle you, the sub woofer will make explosions and sharp sounds rumble so you-feel them.\n- if your source material / DVD / TV show / Blueray does not have 5.1 audio on it, this effect will not be heard.",
"As others have said, the difference is the number of sound channels, ie, the number of individual sound tracks, each of which is tied to a different speaker.\n\nMono: one speaker\n\nStereo: two speakers\n\n5.1: five speakers (front left, front right, front center, back left, back right), one subwoofer\n\nCurrently 5.1 is the surround sound standard, but 7.1 has gained somewhat of a foothold lately, and some theaters have 10.2 or 22.2 systems. ",
"Stereo has 2 channels. Dolby 5.1 has 6 channels.\n\nEach channel can carry a unique audio message to one or more speakers connected to it. Many people who have Dolby 5.1 will have 5 speakers and a sub woofer, each with its own channel and unique audio message.\n\nSay you are watching a movie that supports 6 or maybe even 8 audio channels. You can hear the creaky door in a scary movie on just one speaker in the back corner of your living room. A stereo setup will just have a left and a right channel, so that creaky door will be coming from the whole right side of your living room instead of a specific corner of the right side.\n\nThe channels can also work together like in an action movie where there is a huge explosion behind you. Both back speakers will play the bang, making you hear it from directly behind you. A stereo system can't do that, you would just hear a bang from all speakers.\n\nIf you don't have 6 or more speakers wired up to a surround sound system, you should just stick with stereo."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3h94x1 | why do some electronics, when reset, have the time default to years or decades before it was made? | I just reset my modem and it reset to 01/01/1970. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3h94x1/eli5_why_do_some_electronics_when_reset_have_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu5cgii",
"cu5cspt"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"This is the standard 'start date' for all devices. Time is usually then measured in milliseconds that have passed since 01/01/70. It's just a convention, I mean it has to have *some* default date to fall back upon. \n\nAlso keep in mind that once upon a time this date didn't lie that far in the past... ",
"Many computers use a convention that the \"current time\" is the \"number of seconds since 1/1/1970.\" [Details.](_URL_0_) Since many computers *also* reset their counters to zero when reset, this puts their clock at that date.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_time"
]
] |
|
3ln4ge | why are emotions attributed to the heart instead of the brain? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ln4ge/eli5_why_are_emotions_attributed_to_the_heart/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv7m9pa"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Your chest can actually start to feel painful during a really emotionally traumatizing moment. I believe this is actually caused by your breathing muscles which is also why your breathing becomes sporadic Hence why they call it heartbreak. Because it feels like its your heart. This could be where some ideas of emotions being attributed to the heart while all of it is actually mental."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4m2ykd | why do high-end digital cameras need a physical shutter, while cell phone cameras don't? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4m2ykd/eli5_why_do_highend_digital_cameras_need_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3s46go",
"d3s4pzm",
"d3s506t"
],
"score": [
5,
11,
8
],
"text": [
"They don't necessarily _need_ one - many high end digital cameras can shoot video now as well, so they keep the shutter open all the time to record.\n\nThe difference is that many high end digital cameras are still [SLRs](_URL_0_) where what you see in the view finder is a reflection of what is actually coming through the lens. The allows the photographer to see _exactly_ what will be captured by the sensors, but requires that small mirror cover the sensors to reflect the light up to the view finder. When the photo is taken, the mirror moves out of the way briefly to allow the sensor to capture the image, then moves back.\n\nOther terms, like shutter speed, don't relate to a physical shutter anymore, but keep the same name since they have the same effect.",
"What Ansuz says is really only half the story. Cameras like the Sony A7 don't have a reflex mirror, and are fully electronic, but they still have a physical shutter.\n\nWhile cameras can operate without a shutter, each pixel must be powered up and down to take a photo. It's simply not possible to achieve this in 1/8000 of a second (a speed that many digital SLRs and mirrorless cameras go down to these days), so the pixels are powered up in the dark, exposed for this short amount of time physically, then powered back down in the dark again. It also allows for more precise timing of the exposure time.\n\nAs Ansuz07 says, many shoot video, and they use the shutterless method to do that. As a side note, the 'wobble' that you see when you move digital cameras rapidly is called the 'rolling shutter' effect -- even top end digital cameras would not be able to deal with the amount of data taking a full picture for each frame at the same time would produce, so instead they 'roll' down the frame line by line, only having to process one line of pixels at a time. However, because of this, movement during the 'roll time' will stretch and bend things.",
"Having a physical shutter is *better* than not having one, because the physical shutter can move much faster than a sensor can regulate itself, and so you can achieve higher shutter speeds."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_single-lens_reflex_camera"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
2ioi64 | were the arguments against interracial marriage in the 1960s the same arguments used against gay marriage in 2014? | I was not alive in the 1960s so I don't have the proper historical context, but from what I do know, it seems like the arguments are very similar.
1. Religious reasons were claimed as reason both interracial marriage and gay marriage are wrong.
2. Marriage is defined by one man of the same race and one woman of the same race, just now people against gay marriage claim the same thing, except they drop the race part.
3. Everybody has the same rights, as everybody is allowed to marry someone of the same race. Just now the same people say everybody is allowed to marry someone of the opposite gender.
4. In general, the same region of the country that was against interracial marriage is the same region against gay marriage.
Please correct me where I am wrong. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ioi64/eli5_were_the_arguments_against_interracial/ | {
"a_id": [
"cl3zdkz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"People didn't invoke reason #2 a whole lot to oppose interracial marriage. They claimed it was inherently wrong, but not on definitional grounds.\n\nOnce area where the arguments diverge is on procreation. People often claim that marriage is afforded a special legal status because the state has an interest in producing future generations, something a gay marriage can't do naturally. They also claim that children benefit from having role models of both genders.\n\nWhether you buy those arguments or not, they are something that is different between gay and interracial marriage."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3awh37 | what are the two sides of the story on jane fonda? | So I have heard for a long time that Jane Fonda, ie Hanoi Jane, is a traitor. I have some idea of what she did to earn this title, but what are the details? Second, and what I am really interested in is, what is the other side of the story? Is there a perspective in which she is not a traitor? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3awh37/eli5what_are_the_two_sides_of_the_story_on_jane/ | {
"a_id": [
"csgm9cd",
"csgq8j5"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"She is a prominent celebrity and anti-war activist. During Vietnam she visited Hanoi (capital of North Vietnam/US enemies) to research the bombing damage caused by US bombs. She then claimed that the US were intentionally targeting dams that would cause thousands of civilians to drown. Others claimed the damage was incidental. She was photographed posing on top of a North Vietnam war battery, which earned her the infamous nickname and made people call her a traitor. She claimed she was manipulated into doing the photograph and didn't support North Vietnam OR the US, just wanted war to stop and civilians not to be killed. A conversation was later published between Nixon and Kissinger discussing targeting the dams and intentionally drowning thousands... and Nixon said he'd rather nuke them. ",
" > Is there a perspective in which she is not a traitor?\n\nYou mean BESIDES mean her Constitutionally-protected rights of free speech?\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3z6frd | why do companies make certain items "limited time only"? why not just add them to the menu/shelves all the time? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3z6frd/eli5_why_do_companies_make_certain_items_limited/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyjkn1f",
"cyjkpb3"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Based upon my experience in potato chip sales, we do this to judge demand. We sell x amount of the new product and monitor the rate of sales vs the amount of returns. If the numbers are to our favor, we will potentially turn it into a full time item.",
"By offering an item \"for a limited time only\", a company hopes to create a demand, fueled by people not wanting to miss out on something. \nIt is meant to create excitement, and a perceived need to *buy it now*. The hope is that people will buy more of these during the times they are around, and also run back out to get them again the next time they are offered *for a limited time only*."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2vsl3l | why is usb charging so slow? | Title. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vsl3l/eli5_why_is_usb_charging_so_slow/ | {
"a_id": [
"cokjnev",
"cokjykw"
],
"score": [
11,
6
],
"text": [
"It's not about the USB cable, it's about where it is connected to, and what is its current (measured by Ampers).\nThe higher the current is, the quicker it'll charge.",
"The USB standard limits how much power can go over a standard USB port to a fairly low amount - a mere 2.5W (500mA @ 5V).\n\nSome devices will allow you to go higher than that - I've got a charger that can hit 1900mA (9.5W) if it's connected to the right device. The catch is that the port, the cable & the device have to all be able to agree on *which* nonstandard high-power charging method to use. If they can't agree, the only safe thing to do is to fall back to the standard's 2.5W."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
5vvqu6 | what is going on with the recent cloudflare leak and is my data safe? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vvqu6/eli5_what_is_going_on_with_the_recent_cloudflare/ | {
"a_id": [
"de5bgok"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"For a time, Cloudflare websites were rarely disclosing random data from other websites using Cloudflare. This potentially includes private data, but not necessarily. It could be the contents of an HTTPS request containing nothing interesting (e.g. a Reddit page), it could be an authentication token used for an account on a particular site, etc. It's unlikely that the information disclosed would cause any site-wide breaches, but any private information shared on any Cloudflare site is *potentially* affected. It is very unlikely, but possible, that your particular information was shared.\n\nBecause no one knew that was happening, no one read the data (presumably) as it was occurring--but anything that was saving page requests, like search engines and other crawlers, can retroactively try to interpret that data."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5u5nff | why are there so many political figures tied to russia? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5u5nff/eli5_why_are_there_so_many_political_figures_tied/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddrl832",
"ddrlcs9"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"There really shouldn't be. This is not normal. Ronald Reagan is spinning in his grave. The Republican Party may never recover from this.\n\nBut to answer your question, we don't know yet. So far there is only speculation.",
"Russia has an interest in reducing the US hegemony.\n\nThey will undoubtedly argue that they are merely deploying methods similar to what we applied in destabilizing Ukraine.\n\nAdd to that the fact that Putin is an old KGB guy, entailing he has know-how and may also have a desire to give the US some payback for the fall of the USSR.\n\nAs is commonly the case, it is a mix of level-headed politics, desire for power and human psychology.\n\nTrump and the GOP leadership are the perfect dancing partners due to their lack of commitment to democracy, the deep dark desire for power and tendency to sacrifice the people to secure personal gain."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1v7bzn | why do electronics power adapters have to be bulky boxes where the outlet prongs are instead of having whatever is inside them moved to the other end of the cord, inside the unit that is being powered? | I hate losing an outlet because of this. It's 2013 FFS! Fix this already. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v7bzn/eli5_why_do_electronics_power_adapters_have_to_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"cepefl2",
"cepg16j"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Heat. The ac adapter gives off a fair amount of heat and if it was in the unit being powered there would need to be a fan, like in a PC. It would also make the until being powered a lot bigger.",
"it's all about cost. universal power supplies are more expensive, so you sell the same base product all over the world, paired with an external wall wart appropriate for the local line voltage.\n\ni agree the transformer should be halfway up the power cable, though...\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1q3r2s | how does obamacare affect deadbeats and homeless people? | I have a 30 year old brother who alternates between homelessness and living in my parents basement. He hasn't had a job or any income in years. I briefly looked at rates on _URL_0_ for him and they were around $500/month.
It sounds like he would get a tax credit to set it to zero except for two things.
1. He doesn't have the $500/month up front
2. Any time he does file taxes, any credit is garnished to pay for his delinquent student loans.
The last thing he needs is another commitment he can't fulfill.
I guess he just goes without insurance and takes the 1% income penalty? 1% of zero = zero.
Thanks for any insight! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1q3r2s/eli5how_does_obamacare_affect_deadbeats_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd8unrn",
"cd8uobs"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You're correct that he's probably not going to pay a penalty.\n\nAs for health care, does he have medicaid? If not, he may be able to sign up for nothing. There are plenty of indigent and homeless folks on medicaid.",
"Low income individuals will probably be eligible for low cost or no cost healthcare through their state (or medicaid). Each state does this a bit differently though, so you will need to check for your specific state. This would exempt him from any penalties, and also, you know, provide healthcare to him for little to no cost."
]
} | [] | [
"healthcare.gov"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4aq7if | if i buy something from another country, how does my country's postal service get paid? | Edit: I bought something from china for 20 cents with free shipping and it was delivered to my doorstep, how are they profiting? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4aq7if/eli5_if_i_buy_something_from_another_country_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"d12kybm"
],
"score": [
21
],
"text": [
"By agreement between the members of the Universal Postal Union, each country gets to keep its own postage for international mail, even though the postal service of the destination country or any third countries through which it is routed must assist in delivering the mail. So if you're in the United States and send something to France, the U.S. Postal Service gets to keep all of that money. Conversely though, La Poste gets to keep the postage for mail going the other way. A few decades ago the UPU introduced a new rule, whereby countries that send much more mail to another country than they receive from that country will pay a per-ton amount to compensate that country's postal service. Once such imbalance exists between China and the U.S., so China pays the U.S. every year."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4fdujg | why does the axis of the earth have a bigger role in its weather than the distance from the sun? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fdujg/eli5_why_does_the_axis_of_the_earth_have_a_bigger/ | {
"a_id": [
"d27z1og",
"d27z4ac",
"d27z5if",
"d27z9zn"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
6,
6
],
"text": [
"[This page](_URL_0_) has an image that summarizing the effect very succinctly; basically, the greater off of 90 degrees the angle between the sun and the earth's surface is, the more atmosphere the sun's energy has to travel through and the larger the surface area it's spread over. ",
"The distance from the sun varies by only a couple of percent, while the angle of your part of the sun varies wildly between summer and winter.",
"Our total distance changes by a relatively meager percentage. 147 million km, versus 152 million km, really isn't that big a change compared to the whole.\n\nOn the other hand, a change of angle that light strikes the surface by ~30 degrees off straight up, changes the amount of energy that area of surface is receiving by about 50%. The troposphere of the Earth(where we live) is primarily heated by the energy of the sun striking the surface of the earth and warming it, which in turn warms the air. So if you receive way less energy, you get way less heat. ",
"Because the earth's orbit is practically circular, while the axis angle can change seasonal daylight times by +/- 12 hours.\n\nDaylight hours control how much energy is reaching a particular latitude, and these vary over the same timescale as variations in the orbit do. Earth's orbital distance from the sun varies between 147 million and 151 million km. Which is totally insignificant compared to the scale of sunlight hour variation. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_ideas/EnvSci_p051.shtml#background"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
25bmwc | what would happen if a quebecois prime minister was in office and quebec seceded from canada? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/25bmwc/eli5_what_would_happen_if_a_quebecois_prime/ | {
"a_id": [
"chfo76l"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"That would depend on the political view of the Quebecois prime minister. \n\nThis almost happened in 1995 when Jean Chrétien was the PM of Canada (he was PM from 1993 to 2003). There was the big vote in Quebec whether or not to succeed and it was voted against by a very narrow margin. \n\nChrétien is from Liberal Party and he favours staying with Canada. \n\nIf the vote had been successful or if there is another vote (there have been two referendums already), then there would be a long period of negotiation between the federal government and Quebec. \n\nAnd at this point, it would be impossible to say what the results of such a negotiation would be. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4f5vrs | steam cards. what are they and why do people care? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4f5vrs/eli5_steam_cards_what_are_they_and_why_do_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2662n4"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I asked a question similar to this a while ago on the PCMR subreddit.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nIn short, they are used to level up on steam, which lets you have more friends, display more inventory items and generally customize your profile more.\n\nThey can also be sold, which is my preferred use of them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/4e1cm1/eli5_why_do_people_give_a_shit_about_their_steam/"
]
] |
||
253dgv | what do movie theaters do with their movies when they're done with them? | If they send them back, what do the movie companies do? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/253dgv/eli5_what_do_movie_theaters_do_with_their_movies/ | {
"a_id": [
"chda2gp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Years ago I worked as a projectionist in a small rural town, movies came on several reels, each reel was about 15 minutes or run time. They arrived by mail from the last theater that was showing them & we got labels to mail them to the next theater.\n\nI know movies went to a single large reel somewhere along the line but I don't know if that is still going on. I do know that at least one large movie bin chain sends movies out digitally. They have a high speed network and upload the movie to a digital projector."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
qne39 | why young people generally more politically left-leaning? | Young person here, has the youth of the world always been this way or is just this current generation? Is this phenomenon as prevalent as I think it is or do I just have a skewed view of popular opinion from browsing reddit and other news outlets with predominantly left-wing demographics?
Is it income-related? That's the only factor I can think of at the moment, -that youth rely more on welfare and support from the state when going to university, moving out of home, buying their first home, etc. Whereas older citizens who are comfortable financially no longer feel the need or see the use for a welfare state.
EDIT: Thanks for the responses everyone, there's a lot of great information in here and this is probably the most resoundingly successful ELI5 thread I have ever started. Lots of good discussion and a minimum of flaming! Thanks for the great insight **b0ngsmoke**! I just woke up and need to work but I'll be reading it all later. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/qne39/eli5_why_young_people_generally_more_politically/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3yximg",
"c3yxmmm",
"c3yxnd8",
"c3yxom1",
"c3yyb45",
"c3yycbw",
"c3yyfnz",
"c3yynqr",
"c3yz1nd",
"c3yz24i",
"c3yzd1v",
"c3yzrra",
"c3yztev",
"c3yztl4",
"c3yzwnm",
"c3z03fc",
"c3z0a07",
"c3z0k9x",
"c3z0lei",
"c3z0nmo",
"c3z0tlv",
"c3z0vel",
"c3z0zn6",
"c3z11mt",
"c3z166g",
"c3z1gi6",
"c3z1vdt",
"c3z1wzw",
"c3z1yao",
"c3z1z9v",
"c3z29gs",
"c3z2bgr",
"c3z2f7o",
"c3z2g09",
"c3z2ith",
"c3z2jrb",
"c3z2oh7",
"c3z2v5t",
"c3z38cn",
"c3z3ofn",
"c3z443k",
"c3z4ha4",
"c3z5h8d",
"c3z5u5d",
"c3z7xck",
"c3z8x3e",
"c3z96eu",
"c4o7ur6"
],
"score": [
3,
165,
206,
10,
5,
61,
61,
1074,
4,
86,
15,
13,
11,
112,
11,
8,
3,
5,
4,
2,
3,
2,
4,
3,
2,
11,
2,
7,
2,
3,
2,
3,
4,
2,
2,
5,
4,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think you hit the nail on the head there. Us young people are also generally less religious, and the conservative side usually has a bit of religious flavour to it. \n\nWe like equality, we like being secular, we don't need absurd amounts of money to be happy, and we want to promote a lot of personal freedoms. All of those things coincide with a left leaning political philosophy. ",
"I don't know where you guys live but here, Kentucky, you generally get more liberal as you become more educated. Not that every educated person here is liberal or that you're stupid if you're not. It's just a trend I have noticed. There is one example of a young woman I know who started university as a hard core Bush loving christian and is now a liberal atheist. ",
"It's always this way. It's because of the nature of liberalism and conservatism.\n\nA conservative is someone who opposes change. A liberal is someone who embraces it. The specific political ideals that are associated with each have changed with time, but the attitude towards change is what remains the same.\n\nThe older people get, the more set in their ways they are. The younger generation necessarily sees things just a little differently from the older generation; they're molded by different conditions, and set into slightly different ways. So, while they're still flexible, they're liberal, and when they get tired of change and uncertainty as they age, the become conservative.",
" > has the youth of the world always been this way or is just this current generation?\n\nIt's been an ongoing trend. As a whole, society has been becoming more and more socially liberal over hundreds of years.\n\n > Is this phenomenon as prevalent as I think it is or do I just have a skewed view of popular opinion from browsing reddit and other news outlets with predominantly left-wing demographics?\n\nIts quite skewed. People tend to follow news that they tend to agree with. Look at Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, etc. they have a huge budget due to their followings, yet many liberal leaning people dismiss them.\n\n > Is it income-related?\n\nNo.\n\nThere are a few things that I can say, though most will be speculation. Information and communication are the culprits in my opinion. \n\nInformation: People will always be afraid of the unknown and avoid change. E.G. If tradition tells us to sacrifice virgins to make our crops grow and we don't know otherwise, people will tend to continue sacrificing virgins.\n\nCommunication: Allows for people to access information freely.\n\nI think the biggest factor for the number of social movements recently and the future will be the internet itself (it's a fascinatingly good and efficient communication device)",
"It's a combination of things, of course. Think about the youth culture in the 60's, 70's, and onward in the US. \"Liberal\" culture is always prevalent with young people because it's during these years that most kids are learning. They're more about sharing in general, whether it be information, physical things or wealth. In today's world information is shared at a larger scale than ever before, everything is accessible. It's almost like college never ends. With that, learning never ends so more and more people stay open minded about things thereby staying more liberal in their views. 99% of my family members are Republican-Right, and the vast majority of these people stopped learning a long time ago. They're no longer open minded. \n\nThe idea is when you're single and young you're more apt to be more concerned about \"others\". When these same kids grow up and have a steady job with a family and home to care for, you're more concerned with \"self\". Republican's ride heavy on stay-out-of-my-house-off-my-lawn-and-out-of-my-paycheck. \n\nWhen I was in my early/mid-20's I was fairly liberal with most issues but now that I'm one year from 30 I find myself thinking more conservative about things. I'm MUCH more concerned with \"self\" now. My parents went through this same phase. The difference between myself and my parents is I have the internet to keep me learning and open minded about the world. ",
"Experience, and I don't mean that in a \"you aren't experienced enough to understand the errors of your ways\" type statement. \n\nThe longer you live, the more you see. I have been a person who remains open to helping others under nearly every circumstance. I believe in an inherent desire in people to better themselves and the lives of those on their care. This belief is central to why I think liberally when it comes to social welfare programs. However, for each success story in my personal efforts to help, I see at least 10 people choose to fail and remain dependent upon the care of others because they are too lazy or unwilling to make the right choices. \n\nPeople arrive everyday in the legal aid clinic desperately seeking assistance with child support issues or custody issues, crying about their lives. It makes me care and makes me want to fight for them. However, the next time they show up they are pregnant by a new man or wearing the $150 shoes that I desperately wanted to purchase myself but held off on because it was the economically smart choice. They reply with, \"But this guy is different\" or \"I deserve these shoes after all I've gone through\" No he is not and no you don't!\n\nI walk into houses where the inhabitants collect food stamps and section 8 rent assistance, but they have the HD tv I so desperately wanted along with the Xbox 360 and PS3. \n\nFrankly, when you realize that so many of the people who receive financial assistance via your taxes, squander that money and feel 100% ENTITLED to, you get mad. \n\nYes, I want to keep helping. Yes, I want to care for the less fortunate, but GODDAMMIT, I want to choose who I help because I know that many of these people don't want help, they demand their check because you owe it to them.\n\nThe picture many young people have in their mind is that 90% of people on government assistance are using it to better their lives and require it because their childhoods were shit because nobody helped them. The reality, on the other hand, is that maybe (and I'm being generous here) 50% of people on welfare will use it to better their lives while the other 50% expect it and will use it to make sure their 6mo old is wearing the latest Jordan's.",
"My favorite quote on this from Winston Churchill \n\n > “Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains.”",
"My dad used to be very liberal and somewhat of an activist. This is basically what he told me:\n\nYoung people think the world can change because they see social movements begin and think that good government can help make this happen. As people grow older they see social movements die out and realize the world isn't changing. They have seen more examples of bad government than good which convinces them that less government is better. \n\nThey realize that supporting idealistic causes is only holding them back financially and their boycotts of big corporations is only making them drive further and pay more to get the products they want when they could be spending time and money on their own family.",
"Younger people are more idealistic because generally speaking, their lives have not been complicated by the long term consequences of their decisions. Their idealism leads them to embrace left leaning politics, and liberal politicians exploit them for it. \n\nMost older folks have at least observed (if not analyzed) their decision making process and have at least identified the type of things that have most often worked best for them. These \"success markers\" are then exploited by \"conservative\" politicians.",
"I love this question. Here are some of my thoughts, toned down to ELI5. \n\n < edit > I should have added a disclaimer; I'm in my 30's, in the middle of the below mentioned pay scale, and fairly centrist in my actual views...best described at this point as a libertarian. I can't stand altruistic, unrealistic liberalism and I can't stand oppositional and obnoxious conservatism. < /edit > \n\n1. Charity and the human condition. The younger you are, the less times you have been (for lack of better terminology) screwed over by someone else. It's easy to have faith in humankind when no one has stolen your car, stolen your wallet, stolen your mailbox, stolen the very flowers out of your front yard. Give it time and these things will start happening. You'll see the poor folks who benefit from so many liberal policies, abuse and disregard the intent for those policies. Some folks stick with liberalism, saying it's just a few bad apples. Others decide that humans who don't obey the law aren't worth their hard earned money in the form of taxes, and move away from the public assistance program support. \n\n2. Education. In the educational community, there is what is called the ivory tower syndrome. Basically, universities are a vacuum bubble in reality. The only people going there are people who are trying to better themselves, learn, and contribute - especially in graduate and higher programs. Therefore, it's easy to look around you and see a bunch of great people and ask yourself, why wouldn't I want to help out as many people as possible? Why would't these guys all work together, make the world a better place, share fairly, do their duties, and hold hands at the end of the day? Because really, they mostly would. The liberal policies play out wonderfully in the controlled environment of higher education. As folks graduate and experience the world though, they gather experiences outside of that bubble and often times this moves them away from the \"everyone's good and deserves all we can give them\" mindset that seems to define the far left. \n\nThose are the two areas that I think figure most prominently into folks shifting to the right as they age. I don't discount income. The more money you make, especially on the $0-$200k scale that 99% of us live in, the more money the government takes from your paycheck to pay for the liberal-backed programs in place. This hurts more and more, and as you get older you (generally) increase your earning power to feel more of the pain. There's also the theory that old people are set in their ways and don't want to change, but I don't think this affects the political spectrum as much as one might suspect. \n\nThoughts? This is a great topic. ",
"When you are used to living off other people (AKA Mom and Dad) It's easy to slip into that mindset. Most people wise up a bit when they have to start paying the bills, and the taxes.",
"young people haven't been fucked over by the ponderous, inefficient, and broken policies of big government enough to realize that getting the government involved in social policy makes problems worse, not better. after years of wasted time, wasted money, and watching progress slow to a halt, older people are more aware that the government is simply the largest, worst run corporation in the country.",
"Yes, it has always been this way, and you are wise to realize this. Many young idealists believe that they are the first generation to stand for change in the world; much in the same way that a teenage athiest thinks he's the first person to ever consider that there might not be a God. It's very annoying to the rest of us who have grown out of it.",
"Its hard to believe that no one here has said the actual answer yet. \n\n\nYoung people *are not* more politically left-leaning than the rest of the population as a general rule. However, the people who are young right now *are* more politically left-leaning than the rest of the population. \n\nThe current \"young\" cohort (which is just the demographic term for generation) are known as Millennials or Generation Y (_URL_1_). This cohort is more liberal, on average, than the rest of the population. And it is this cohort that is \"coming of age\" right now because they were generally born in the 1980s and are now in their 20s - 30s.\n\nContrast this with Generation X (the cohort preceding Generation Y) which is more conservative (_URL_0_).\n\nThe truth is that people do not generally become more liberal or more conservative over time. Actually, cohorts gravitate towards one end of the political spectrum and tend to stay there for the rest of their lives. \n\nIts very possible that Generation Z (those born in the 90s) will end up being more conservative and someone in 15-20 years will ask why young people are generally more politically right-leaning. ",
"economically because as you get older you have to actually pay taxes and deal with the government.\n\nsocially, because you have kids and get scared for them.",
"A young person has spent his entire life having his needs provided for by his parents. So the only model he really *knows* is one where a benevolent authority figure takes care of people in need. Naturally he supports a strong welfare state. \n\nAs he grows older and becomes responsible for himself, he begins to understand that making good choices and working hard helps him do better in life, and helps him best provide for his family. So when the authorities take more and more of his earnings and give it to other people who he thinks are making *bad* choices and working *less* hard, he gets resentful. He wants the government to get stop interfering in his life. [Here I'm using a more classical understanding of conservatism, not the currently popular xenophobic, warfare-oriented understanding of conservatism.]\n\nAlso, in rare cases, as he gets older he'll learn enough [economics](_URL_1_) to understand [why welfare programs do more harm than good](_URL_0_), and will advocate against them. ",
"Where I live (Texas) the younger population is left winging only in social issues (Marijuana, gay rights, etc.), but are Republican when it comes to issues involving foreign affairs and the economy. This could just be because young people are more open minded when it comes to social issues, having not been grown up being taught the same thing as the older generation. ",
"In terms of income I realized that young people don't pay a lot of taxes ( they usually fall within a pretty low income bracket). So younger people are more open or dependent upon social programs that might help them (Universal Healthcare, welfare, food stamps, etc.). \n\nAs you begin to have a higher income and realize a lot of your taxes are going to things you might not agree with (the military, oil subsidies, the banks), you begin to want to pay fewer taxes. Leaving people a bit more pessimistic about government and maybe wanting to reduce its size or lower taxes. ",
"[Francois Guisot \\(1787-1874\\): \"Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head.](_URL_0_)\n\n",
"Because they are unexperienced and naive. ",
"You try to change the rules of the game until you start winning.",
"I dont think its a left or right thing at all. I think young people very idealistic in whatever brand of reality interpretation they happened to subscribe to. Ideals erode just like rocks and paint jobs. ",
"Here's a quote from Winston Churchill that's relevant: \"If you're a conservative before you're 30 you have no heart. If you're a liberal after 30 you have no brain.\" Also I totally knew it was from Winston Churchill and did not at all attribute it to Law and Order: SVU. Just so you know!",
"One idea is that the youth of today spend more time in government schools. They tend to go to universities for an additional 4-8 years on top of 12-13 years of government school. \n\nGenerally speaking, most government institutions require students to take very liberal (big government) classes such as economics and world history. They learn about how government programs *solved* all of the problems of the past and how the government is necessary to control the markets. I can't stress enough how much government indoctrination goes on in 12-20 years of government school. \n\nJust look at the welfare state. It has increased tremendously. More children are associated with family members that depend on the state. Opposing big government is the same as opposing the people who are dependent on the government. \n\n\nI'm 25. ",
"The way I see it is this.\nThere are two primary moral ideas that form the foundations of our political ideologies.\n\nThe first is the idea of fairness. This aligns with a liberal philosophy.\n\nThe second is that of power hierarchies. This fits with a conservative philosophy.\n\nA young person is usually sitting at the bottom of any local power structure. Therefore the concepts of fairness offer the best return in terms of political or economic gains.\n\nAs they get older they usually move up the power ladder until they get to a point were maintaining the status-quo offers the best returns.\n\nOf course it does not usually happen like that in a calculated manner. And there are plenty of examples where people do not give up their earlier convictions.\n\nThere is one other reason to adopt a conservative philosophy: magical thinking. This is the idea that if you support the politics that serves the powerful you will in turn become more powerful. With enough people thinking like that, it does work to an extent (think of a small town where you can only get local government contracts if you are a member of the right party or club).",
"For me it was that I was willing to help out everyone when I was younger. Now that I'm a grown man with a family to watch out for, I'm not so interested in helping anyone outside of my family. Liberals spend more money on helping others while conservatives take more of an \"every man for himself\" approach.\n\nWhen I was a kid, if I had $1000 I'd be okay giving up $500 for good causes. As an adult with $1000 I want $1001 to take care of my family. ",
"Disregard if this has already been said, but the media is so, incredibly, left wing.",
"Two reasons:\n\n * Young people simply don't *know* as much\n * Young people haven't had the countless experiences of just how *badly* even the best-intentioned of deliberate initiatives turn out\n\nAnd so they tend not to be up-to-speed on economics; and they believe that radical change without disastrous unforeseen consequences is easy to achieve.\n\nOh, and finally, they don't know anything about public choice theory, and believe that people working for the State somehow have better motives.",
"the best way to trap a free mind is to put it through school.",
"I don't think the OP's premise is correct.",
"You accidentally a word",
"They don't pay taxes. \n\nWhen you have a family to support later in life you're going to want more stability and less change. ",
"Brainwashing from overly pc society. Takes personal experience to really see how the world is.",
"Young people want and believe in *change*. They still believe that \"the system\" isn't broken. Young people aren't usually business owners or major contributors to political candidates.\n\nOld people want *stability* and for things to stay as they are because this is where they are most comfortable. Old people tend to have more disposable income and an understanding of the political process.\n\nTogether, this is why young people are perceived to be more vigilant or aggressive in their beliefs while old people can be more \"passively active\" in keeping the status quo.",
"i think reality tends to sink into our beliefs as we get older and while the truth may hold a liberal bias, reality is far from it.",
"\"there's something pathetic about someone over the age of 27 believing they can change the world\" - Chuck Palahniuk.",
"As one gets older, one starts to find a place within the current system, how to get what you want and generally start to understand on a deeper level how things work. As such, it's normal that you'd get more and more conservative as you age, as you don't want to undo all that useful experience. \n\nYounger people just see a system they don't understand or approve of and want to change it to something that makes more sense to them. ",
"My old man has a saying (that he picked up) that stuck with me over the years: \n\n > \"If you aren't a liberal when you are young, you don't have a heart. If you aren't a conservative when you are old, you don't have a brain.\" \n\n",
"When you grow up, your heart dies.",
"\"If you're 20 and conservative then you have no heart; if you're 40 and liberal then you have no money.\"",
"A roughly trandlated German saying I hear quite a lot:\n\"If you're younger than 30 and not *left*, you don't have a heart.\nIf you're older than 30 and still *left*, you don't have a brain.\"\n\nOriginal: Wer unter 30 ist und nicht links hat kein Herz, wer über 30 ist und immernoch links, hat keinen Verstand.\n\nAs for me, I'm 20 and pretty left-leaning, as OP phrases it. Yet I don't rely on the state to fund my education, I rely on my parent's money.\nI also know a lot of people 15-25yrs old who are irritatingly right-leaning, conservative and, well, arrogant brats who somehow assume that the fact that they'll inherit their parent's money means that social welfare of any kind is wrong.\nThose are also people who believe that a lot of rich people lead to lesser poor people.\n\nSomething about cognitive dissonance and the people you get your values from.\n",
"Think about this: today's liberals will be tomorrow's conservatives.\n\nThis doesn't necessarily mean that their views will change to be more conservative, but rather the sociopolitical spectrum will shift towards a more liberal ideology because as a society we will begin to tolerate more ideas as we are exposed to them. So in comparison, their once liberal ideas will *seem* conservative to the young people of tomorrow. ",
"\" Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains.”\n-- Winston Churchill\n _URL_0_",
"You're only five, Timmy, and even you can tell how wrong the angry, abusive, fat man on the radio is. You can already tell how little the 2012 republican candidates care for us. Even you can tell that Pokemon and Power Rangers are fun stories that someone made up. I would argue that you are liberal, not because it's something to grow out of, but because it's how someone uninfluenced by the mainstream media naturally feels. Even though that influence turns many of us into grouches, angry and bitter at the world, we can fight back by learning as much as possible about life, nature, countries, societies, the universe, beliefs, karate, science, beards, and our role in the big picture.\n\nThe more you learn about the world, the closer you feel to everyone and everything. The closer you feel to others and the environment, the less you want to hate them, enslave them, steal from them, and hurt them. You're already super smart, but as you get smarter, you understand better that the truly important things are not found down the barrel of a gun or hiding in the darkness of our own fear and hate, rather in working together, getting rid of harmful behavior, and pursuing knowledge with all of our strength. \n\nI don't know about you, but all this thinking has made one thing very clear. We need ice cream cones right this very second. \n",
"In short, younger people have very little understanding of how the world actually works.",
"Because most kids are indoctrinated in government run schools to obey authority and the government.",
"You're young you want to change the world...when you're old a lot of those changes have come about and the others are far more daunting than your limited young worldview realized. You've also realized you could lose everything just by speaking up and you don't mind as much leaving the fight to the young generations. As you get much older you just don't see the need for all the fighting in the first place and, dammit, some of those things kids want to change are pretty good in the first place.\n\nIt's always been like that.",
"One thing that I've always thought is that, as young adult, you want equality. You want nothing more than change, peace, and the expansion of the middle class. So, you are left-leaning, as democrats support programs like welfare, etc. Then, as you age, and you work hard as hell for your money, you no longer wish to make things equal. You earned what you have. Republicans are for keeping the money they make. Democrats are for giving away people's money to others."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.gallup.com/poll/118285/democrats-best-among-generation-baby-boomers.aspx",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenial_Generation"
],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1r-r6iLBEI&feature=related",
"http://www.amazon.com/Economics-One-Lesson-Shortest-Understand/dp/0517548232"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Guizot"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/95528"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.