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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
33hevf | search warrants and probable cause in the united states | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33hevf/eli5_search_warrants_and_probable_cause_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqkw3zy",
"cqkw6a3",
"cqky48g"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"American citizens have legal protection from unwarranted or undue search and seizure. If the government doesn't have good reason to believe that you are doing something illegal, they have no right to invade your privacy. It's a protection afforded by the Constitution.\n\nA search warrant is a legal document signed by a judge giving police permission to search the property of a citizen without their consent. Probable cause is the \"good reason\" to authorize the search.\n\nWhat exactly counts as \"probable cause\" is kind of amorphous though, and will vary by district. ",
"With some exceptions, the 4th amendment protects U.S. citizens from searches by police without a search warrant. A search warrant is a court order from a judge and is obtained when the officer has probable cause. There isn't really a fixed probability threshold for probable cause. It's a little hand-wavey and depends on the circumstances.\n\nIf a police officer performs a search without a search warrant and no exceptions apply, the evidence can be excluded during trial. Some situations where a search warrant isn't necessary include when there are exigent circumstances, when the object is in plain view, and when its during arrest.",
"law student here:\n\nThe 4th Amendment protects citizens from **unreasonable** intrusions into their privacy. So this is basically the analysis:\n\nLet's say you are in your house, minding your own business, when suddenly police bust into your house and begin rummaging through your stuff, then take a packet of information from your bookshelf.\n\nWhat do you do?\n\nWell, the first question is \"were the officer's actions unreasonable?\" To figure that out, we have something called the \"Katz Analysis,\" where you ask two questions: (1) Did /u/Renson have a subjective, reasonable expectation of privacy in the property/items searched/seized?; and (2) Does society generally support such an expectation.\n\nHere, it is likely that you, inside your home, had a reasonable expectation of privacy -- and you also had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the packet of info on your bookshelf. Plus, it is safe to say that society would support that (most people would be offended by police barging into their home, going through their personal belongings, and taking personal property).\n\nSo after a *Katz* analysis, we can argue that the search was, in fact, unreasonable. This now triggers the **warrant requirement**.\n\nBut first, what would happen if, after the analysis, we decide there was no reasonable expectation of privacy? For example, if you had a bunch of drugs on top of your picnic basket, and a cop passing by sees them, reaches into your basket, and takes your containers of drugs... because you had no reasonable expectation of privacy in your drugs that were openly visible in a public park, the warrant requirement isn't triggered and the officer was justified in searching/seizing your property.\n\nBut back to where we were: you had a reasonable expectation of privacy in your home, which triggers a warrant requirement. What does that mean?\n\nWell, a warrant creates a barrier for abuse. Rather than having police decide when they can perform otherwise unreasonable searches, we say, \"You know what, let's make it so a neutral, respectable party has to authorize it.\" This is a judge.\n\nSo maybe the officer knows that you are a drug dealer. And they know that you have a packet of information where you keep records on all your drug deals. Police begin to gather evidence of your crimes until they have an \"articulable level of suspicion\" of your crime. They put this all in paper and submit it to a judge, and the judge reviews it. If the judge agrees that there is enough evidence to support the search/seizure, they sign it and give it back to the officers.\n\nThe officers now how permission to enter your property and search/seize to the extent of what the judge has authorized. Here, that means they may enter and seize that packet of information... they can't just tear up your house, search your computer, etc. However, if the warrant is general enough, they may be able to look anywhere the records may be (which, if slips of paper, could be anywhere). But let's change the example a bit... let's say they are looking for guns. They would be allowed to search anything capable of concealing a gun (boxes, drawers, etc.), but they wouldn't be allowed to go through envelopes, small containers, and other things that are \"outside the scope\" of the warrant.\n\nSo if the warrant is valid, then the search/seizure is justified. If the warrant is invalid (or nonexistent), then the search is invalid and any evidence obtained is considered \"fruit of the poisonous tree\" and is inadmissible in court as evidence of your crime...\n\n...**UNLESS** police can show one of several excuses under the circumstance. One excuse could be that someone inside of your home saw police walking outside, screamed for help, which justified them entering your home, at which point they saw evidence of the crime. Another is \"plain sight,\" which would be like if you decided to grow a marijuana plant in the front window of your home... because it is in plain sight of the officer, and because it is immediately recognizable as a crime, police don't need to seek a warrant to seize it.\n\n**tl;dr** Society wants police to be smart, and they want police to catch criminals... but they don't want police to just search everything and rummaging through everything to discover crimes... rather, they want them to notice crimes, then gather evidence to stop it. So we balance that out with the 4th Amendment and make it so we can effectively prevent crime while not preventing a \"parade of horribles\" by enabling police abuse.\n\n**tl;dr;tl;dr:** If reasonable expectation of privacy -- > need warrant; if no warrant or no special circumstances -- > evidence inadmissible... If no reasonable expectation of privacy -- > no need for warrant."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
edgfjz | why is the atmosphere cold? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/edgfjz/eli5why_is_the_atmosphere_cold/ | {
"a_id": [
"fbhnfr9",
"fbhnmr9",
"fbhnz4n"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Temperature drops with increased elevation in the lower atmosphere. The temperature we feel is the air temperature. The higher up you go in elevation, the less dense the air becomes, meaning that it holds less heat. If thin air holds less heat, then that means the air temperature is lower in thin air. I believe that in dry air, temperature drops by about 1° Celsius for every 100 metres of elevation.",
"Why do you think sun is closer to atmosphere? It isn't. Atmosphere is part of Earth. Atmosphere gets majority of heat from the ground heating, sun is just a massive plasma ball 8 light minutes away from us. It's cold because it's a poor heat conductor and because our planet is in space which is very very very cold.",
"The sun and core of the planet heat the ground. As warm air rises, it expands and cools down. To add to this, air far away from the ground radiates heat into space."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
55s7mp | what is the smallest a habitable planet could be? | More specifically, what is the smallest a planet could be while still being habitable for human beings with no need of artificial assistance? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/55s7mp/eli5_what_is_the_smallest_a_habitable_planet/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8d8u18",
"d8d9zea"
],
"score": [
6,
5
],
"text": [
"There are a couple of factors that determine the optimal size for an ecosystem, like organismal space and diversity. These would influence planet size, but there is one big daddy that would overshadow most other factors: biochemical cycling.\n\n\"What's that?\" Good question. All life on Earth uses similar molecules to survive: Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen (unless it's an anaerobic bacteria), Phosphorus, and Hydrogen are the biggest elements found, but there are other important elements found at lower concentrations too. If you have an element present in an ecosystem there are only 2 places that element can be\n\n1. Inside of an organism\n\n2. In the environment\n\nBiochemical cycling is the transition of molecules between these 2 states. The smallest size a planet could be is the smallest size where the biochemical cycling can still happen normally to ensure life survives and doesn't become starved or overrun with nutrients.",
"I think the limiting aspect would be not so much size, as mass. You want the planet to have enough of its own gravity to be able to retain an atmosphere about as dense and thick as Earth's. (Dense to keep the atmospheric pressure we are used to and that our bodies are evolved for, same levels of oxygen, etc. Thick to filter out UV light and cosmic background radiation.)\n\nIt probably could be smaller than the Earth if it had more heavy metals in the core, but there's also a balance - it would rotate faster, which means stronger centrifugal forces on the atmosphere... wish I was good enough at science to calculate it. :)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
439xkw | is geothermal energy perpetual? how does earth remain so hot? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/439xkw/eli5_is_geothermal_energy_perpetual_how_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"czgmadi",
"czgmkm1",
"czgmq98"
],
"score": [
3,
12,
2
],
"text": [
"In part, the Earth is still hot from when it formed. However, most of the heat down underground actually comes from radioactive isotopes decaying and releasing heat.",
"It's not perpetual. It'll eventually run out (but it will take billions of years). \n\nThe earth produces around 47 TW (terawatts) of heat. For reference, the USA uses about 0.5 TW of electrical power. So across the globe, the earth produces around 100x as much geothermal heat power as the USA uses in electricity.\n\nOf the 47 TW of geothermal heat, it is estimated that over half comes from decaying radioactive elements in the earth's crust (like Uranium 238). The rest is primordial heat, left over from when the earth was originally formed from a cloud of hot gas.\n\nSource: wikipedia",
"The earth is full of radioactive elements: Thorium, Uranium and radioactive elements which all decay at a rate according to their half life. This decay releases energy as heat which is what warms up the earth. Due to the mass of the earth and high heat capacity of magma there's heck of alot of thermal energy knocking around which takes a long time to radiate off. \n\nEventually all the radioactive elements will decay and stop producing heat but that's likely millions if not billions of years away"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3669f9 | why do cars have blind spots (dead angle)? can't we design side mirrors that would help eliminate this problem? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3669f9/eli5_why_do_cars_have_blind_spots_dead_angle_cant/ | {
"a_id": [
"crb3706",
"crb3i1k",
"crbci3l",
"crbofp4"
],
"score": [
20,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You actually can set up mirrors on a regular car to eliminate blind spots. Most people just set their mirrors up incorrectly.",
"You can get a blind spot mirror to put on your mirrors: \n\n_URL_2_\n\nSome cars have blind spot enhancements on their mirrors where the outer rim is a wide angle mirror:\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThis can be clunky. The Accord even has a camera mounted under it's mirror which is used to show a visual of the blind spot and distance.\n\n_URL_1_\n",
"Vans have a strip on the end of the mirror that create another mirror effect, because obviously you can't check your blind spot in a van.",
"Call me over enthusiastic but I have long dreamed of invisible i-beams. LED screen on the inside, camera (s) on the outside. I hate that giant dead spot as you are going around a corner and you're staring at the beam between your windshield and your door window."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/120905_139_edit.jpg",
"http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/2013-Honda-Accord-EX-L-V-6-Sedan-int-012.jpg",
"http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81Ylnj-R%2BBL._SL1500_.jpg"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
3usdcz | in tennis, why do most women to scream whenever they hit the ball, but most men play in silence? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3usdcz/eli5_in_tennis_why_do_most_women_to_scream/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxhej3z",
"cxhf88u",
"cxhgrr0",
"cxhivy2"
],
"score": [
56,
5,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"There are really two parts to this, neither is completely black & white:\n\n\n*Women grunting*\n\n\n[One belief is that](_URL_0_) grunting when you strike the ball generates more power. Players naturally inhale before striking the ball to stabilise their core (support their body), and exhale when striking the ball. If you exhale simply by relaxing you risk losing control of your support, so players are taught to forcefully exhale. The easiest way of telling if a player is doing that is to teach them to vocalise it. That way if they do not exhale correctly you can immediately tell. \n\n\nThe second theory is that some do it to hide how they've hit their shot, and there have been women players who have complained about this in the past. The different spins and power a player can hit the ball with make distinctive sounds at the point of contact between ball and racquet, and so some players deliberately grunt in order to mask the sound. As women's tennis is slower-paced than men's due to less power/slower movement, using different spins without your opponent realising can give you an advantage. ie. If they don't realise the ball is going to come off the ground differently, they are more likely to miss their shot. \n\n\n*Men*\n\n\nThe fact is men do grunt. The top 4 players of the last decade are Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic, and Andy Murray - out of all of these, Roger Federer is the only one who doesn't grunt on almost every shot. The women do tend to scream instead, whereas the men seem to be somewhere between a grunt and a shout these days. However, it isn't completely a new thing: Jimmy Connors is one of the greats of the game, played from the early 70's all the way through to the mid 90's. He had a distinctive 'bark' even then, so it's been around a long time. ",
"I would grunt in high school tennis (I'm a guy) during my serve and when returning balls that were travelling really fast. I didn't do it on purpose it just happened.",
"There's also a theory out there that it has to do with a timing issue. By shrieking like a hyena (Seles, Sharapova, etc.) they can time the exact beat of the grunt with the hit on the ball, they can reproduce the timing accurately.\n\nTo me, it just makes the sport unwatchable.",
"It used to be that all the guys would grunt and make various sounds, and women would be silent. Then, Monica Seles ascended in the sport, and she was a notorious grunter. She even got in trouble for grunting and was incessantly ridiculed, so much so that she went totally silent in some matches. In any case, some have accused a particular coach of encouraging grunting as a tactic, though he has denied it. Whatever the truth is, some feel it may be an effective tactic and it's become pretty common now for everybody."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.brunel.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/news-items/ne_80231"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3pysi7 | what part of the brain controls ejaculation? and why cant we control it on demand? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3pysi7/eli5_what_part_of_the_brain_controls_ejaculation/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwamw2v"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"The male sexual response is mediated largely by the subconscious Autonomic Nervous System, which includes both the parasympathetic (\"rest & digest\") and the sympathetic (\"fight or flight\") systems. Again, these are both largely subconscious, meaning that we don't have much direct control over their activation.\n\nA common mnemonic used in anatomy classes is \"**P**oint and **S**hoot\" for remembering that \"pointing\" (erection) is mediated by the **P**arasympathetic system and the \"shooting\" (ejaculation) is mediated by the **S**ympathetic system. It's a fun line of thought to explore how men are primarily parasympathetic-driven during the initial stages of sexual arousal and transition to a primarily sympathetic-driven physiology as they reach orgasm. \n\nHope this helps!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
26zoo0 | how a cpap or bipap machine works? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26zoo0/eli5_how_a_cpap_or_bipap_machine_works/ | {
"a_id": [
"chvzwrb"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It's essentially just an air pump that adds some moisture too. \n\nBy adding some pressure through a pump, it forces the airway open, so when someone would stop breathing or snore, the air opens the passage and you breath properly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
rjv7e | the "chopity-chopity-chopity" thing wind occaisonally does when you're driving with the windows down | Not always, but often, when I'm driving or riding in a car, we'll experience a slightly annoying disturbance to the air flow. It's a rapidly repeating "chop" sound and feel. What causes it, does it have an actual name, and is there a way to prevent it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/rjv7e/eli5_the_chopitychopitychopity_thing_wind/ | {
"a_id": [
"c46ek6e",
"c46esf9",
"c46lfj8"
],
"score": [
2,
26,
2
],
"text": [
"Wind buffeting is the name of it - really the only way I've found to prevent it is to roll down other windows or roll yours up a bit. It's more than slightly annoying, it actually hurts my ears when it happens, but you aren't alone :D",
"It's called [\"Helmholtz resonance\"](_URL_0_). The air pressure inside your car with the windows up is much higher than the fast moving air surrounding your car while you travel down the freeway. Rolling down your windows causes the high pressure air inside to escape your car quickly. As this happens the pressure inside your car becomes slightly lower than the pressure outside which inturn causes more air to be drawn in to increase the pressure once again. This process repeats over and over again and causes the horrible brain-splitting pressure oscillations.",
"Fantastic ELI5, this is why they were made and a wonderful answer. Loved this one, it happens to everyone ! "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmholtz_resonance"
],
[]
] |
|
3xzi9p | why do donuts heat up so fast? | Whenever I put my donuts in the microwave, they heat up in around 10 seconds to burning hot. Why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3xzi9p/eli5_why_do_donuts_heat_up_so_fast/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy966b7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Partly because of the donut shape. Donuts have a hole for the same reason [bundt cakes](_URL_0_) have their shape.\n\nConsider how heat moves through your food. If it's in the oven or microwave, the heat will hit the outside first, and then it has to travel through conduction to the inside... So if it's a big, thick cake, it's going to take a while to get all the way in.\n\nBut what if there's more surface area? There's more \"outside\" to warm, so the outside heats faster, so the inside heats faster? With donuts (and bundt cakes), the ring shape means you have a big ring of \"inside\" with a lot of \"outside\" available for your microwave to heat up, rather than one big ball of inside that has to wait a long time for the outside to heat up.\n\n[It works with leftovers, too](_URL_1_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://pixelatedcrumb.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Pumpkin_Buttermilk_Bundt_Cake-2.jpg",
"https://twitter.com/lifehacks/status/438463039793528832"
]
] |
|
2t80l3 | how do babies gain so much weight with so little protein? | All people talking about gainz whilst drinking so many protein shakes, how do babies gain muscle so quickly then if they are eating a significant less amount of protein (even for body weight). | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2t80l3/eli5_how_do_babies_gain_so_much_weight_with_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnwklaz",
"cnwkpjv",
"cnwlunu",
"cnwlyze"
],
"score": [
5,
11,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Mother's milk has a fairly large amount of protein, and with them being small it takes less to have a noticeable affect. ",
"People don't need *that* much protein to grow healthy tissue. Babies and children get plenty of protein from regular-ass food (not to be confused with regular ass-food).\n\nBreast milk has a lot of protein, as well as fats, carbohydrates, vitamins and minerals, which you also need to make killer gainz bro. You could argue it's the most \"well-balanced\" diet out there. I'm slightly disappointed that you, /u/bigbouncytitties, did not know this.\n\nThe only thing a baby would gain(z) from drinking protein shakes is the foulest diarrhea ever.",
"Nature, dude. Milk is made for making babies grow.",
"Milk is a surprisingly powerful food. Lots of fat, sugars, and protein. In fact, some research indicates that part of the reason many Northern/Eastern Europeans are so *freaking huge* (like all those dudes in the Strongman competitions from Romania, Lithuania, Sweden, etc) is because of all the milk their ancestors drank several thousand years ago when herding cattle became common.\n\nMost people have the gene that allows their bodies to produce an enzyme called *lactase* which is responsible for breaking down *lactose* (which is a sugar) to be absorbed in the blood stream. People who are lactose intolerant don't produce enough lactase. The result is cramping, bloating, farting, etc. Northern and Eastern Europeans have the lowest frequency of lactose intolerance. Thousands of years ago, natural selection gradually took effect, and the majority of the population ended up with lactose *tolerant* genes and very large bodies. Eastern and Northern Europeans are still, to this day, the top consumers of milk per capita in the entire world.\n\nSide note: Asians have the highest frequency of lactose intolerance, which is partly why you don't find a lot of dairy in traditional Asian food."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7ty0y5 | why when we become self-aware of something, such as blinking, we have an increased urge to do it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ty0y5/eli5_why_when_we_become_selfaware_of_something/ | {
"a_id": [
"dtgeh9g",
"dtget71",
"dtgjr27",
"dtgk8rh",
"dtgqzv5",
"dtgsdmj"
],
"score": [
3777,
50,
13,
11,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Take a second to think about blinking. Now that you’re thinking about it, you probably stopped blinking to see what would happen. In this time, you may have missed several blinks that would’ve happened naturally and not really even been noticed. Now, you’re brain is going to go “oh crap, I didn’t blink! Let me make up for it right now!” and you’ll blink several times to “get caught up” from the blinks you “missed.” Now that your brain has reset itself on blinking, you’ll think “have o blinked enough? Maybe I should throw in a couple more JUST IN CASE,” this the increased urge to do it. ",
"You normally don't do it more. You just realize that you are blinking more than you normally notice. If you were to notice your breathing, it does not increase the rate of which you breathe, unless you try to breathe faster. I'm not expert but I think the same applies for blinking.",
"Something to do with the recticular activating system and habituation? \n\nHabituation: the process where the brain ignores repetitive, meaningless stimulation.",
"This would fall under the ‘compulsions’ category. Different people will do this to different degrees. On the extreme end, those with OCD-like behavior and/or anxiety could do this more frequently and for longer periods. ",
"Normally you're not consciously aware of your processes like blinking or breathing. However, you can take active control by thinking about it. When you do, you break the pattern that your breathing/blinking was in. This along with the fact that you're actually noticing it means it feels irregular and maybe faster. That doesn't mean you're actually blinking more.",
"Because blinking, breathing and a host of other functions are involuntary actions. But you can also do them voluntarily. When you read about them or otherwise think about these actions, you are then voluntarily doing them because you're thinking about them. When you think about them or read about them, the power of suggestion influences your brain and so you voluntarily do them more.\n\nIt's sort of like when you see someone yawning, or reading about yawning, or even thinking about yawning, you want to yawn yourself."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
58khtx | scientifically speaking, what determines the color a leaf will change to in the fall and do trees always change the same color year after year? | Edit: Wow, thank you everyone for your answers! I didn't expect anyone to take such a valid interest in my question! Thank you very much! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/58khtx/eli5_scientifically_speaking_what_determines_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"d918rsq",
"d918usk",
"d919ifk",
"d91b9cd",
"d91cbl2",
"d91julu",
"d91liy8",
"d91llq3",
"d91lxmi",
"d91m2fe",
"d91o282",
"d91ozbe",
"d91pkzc",
"d91vep1",
"d91y651",
"d92284d",
"d928cp9",
"d93e7kj"
],
"score": [
1021,
28,
102,
13,
2,
7,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
5,
7,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Well I don't remember too much about leaf senescence and pigments right now, but here is a quick answer to hold you over until someone comes along and corrects me.\n\nBasically, leaves have colour because of pigments. Different pigments absorb different colours (wavelengths) of light. They also reflect other colours. Leaves are generally green because of the well known pigment chlorophyll . It reflects green light, hence why it appears green. However there are two main types of chlorophyll, A and B. Red maple trees have...red leaves. They have mainly chlorophyll B, and anthocyanins, and other pigments. So for any given tree, it has chlorophyll (A, B, or both) in different amounts, along with other pigments that are not as \"strong\" as chlorophyll (present in lesser concentration s). Once a leaf begins to senesce (prepare to fall off), chlorophyll \"dies off\" (breaks down) and leaves the other pigments you could not see because of the over powering chlorophyll. Mostly red, yellow and orange reflecting pigments are left. Hence the colours. \n\nA specific tree will generally stay the same colour every year, but a plant can have different amounts of pigment in a leaf (or cell), at a different time of day! So the colour can change year to year. but not too much usually.\n\nHope somebody can correct me, as I'm going from a course I took 3 years ago by memory. I haven't studied this area in quite a while. \n\nSource: Msc student studying plant metabolism\n\nTLDR: once main pigment chlorophyll is gone, the accessory pigments show up and give pretty colours.\n\nEdit: just to add the accessory pigments (anthocyanins, xanthophylls, and carotenoids) are there to absorb more wavelengths of light that chlorophyll can't do well. Chlorophyll A and B absorb similar, but different ranges of wavelengths. The compliment of all pigments creates a wider range of wavelengths to be used in photosynthesis, so more food for the plant is made.\n\nEdit 2: there are some really good comments below adding to this and explaining this more in depth. Check em out.",
"I'm no arborist but here's what I've been told. \n\nLeaves are actually not green. They are red, orange, or yellow, depending on the species. During the Spring and Summer they are flush with chlorophyll, a green pigment which covers the surface of the leaf, collecting sunlight to be turned into energy via a process called photosynthesis.\n\nIn the Fall as the weather cools, the chlorophyll goes away and we get to see the leaves' true colors until they fall and wither, their vivid colors fading to brown as they die.",
"As you know, leaves have green chlorophyll that absorbs light. Different species of trees also have different amounts of different carotenoids within their leaves. These carotenoids are just yellow to red pigmentation that helps absorb different spectrums of light, just like green chlorophyll. This helps the plant absorb different energy spectrums from the sun that the chlorophyll cannot. Throughout the year, chlorophyll is continuously replaced. Chemical changes within the tree and light changes signal a process that replaces chlorophyll slower than it replaces it. There is less light during the later months, so the tree doesn't need to produce as much chlorophyll, as it is preparing for winter. This degradation of chlorophyll, usually during fall, starts to present more of the carotenoids that the chlorophyll usually covers. Some species have anthocyanins in their leaves that show up as a purple to red color. Some of these species mix anthocyanins with carotenoids to create a full spectrum of deep oranges, fiery reds, and bronze colors. Depending on the species of tree, chemical signals, climate, temperature, rainfall, and timing, different colors will show first during fall or even during different growing seasons. If all the factors are the same from year to year, the colors will be the same and show first the same way in the same species of trees. \n\nSource: Currently taking a plant science class.",
"1) **Tree genetics**. The reds and purple colors are anthocyanins---these are made *during* autumn. Certain species of trees have a greater genetic potential to make these, like Red Maple and Sweetgum (both Eastern North American trees). Xanthophylls and carotenoids (yellow/orange) are always present in the leaves and these just become more obvious as the chlorophyll breaks down.\n\n2) **Weather**. Weather conditions absolutely have an effect on how much of that colorful potential is reached. Sunny, cool days=more color. Places with dry autumns tend to have more diverse and widespread fall color.\n\nSo **fall color is dependent on the species present and the weather.**\n\n[Red Maple with anthocyanins](_URL_0_)\n\n[Larch with xanthophylls](_URL_1_)",
"Green pigment, called chlorophyll, of leaves that absorbs red light breaks down in the fall as the temperature declines. The color a leaf will change to is determined by the remaining underlying pigments, called xanthophylls and carotenoids, and whether red pigments, called anthocyanins, are being produced. Trees that don't make the red fall pigments will turn from green to yellow. Orange fall leaves are a result of moderate red pigment production. And lastly, red to purple leaves have produced lots of red pigments, beginning in late summer.",
"Nobody is answering the question you are asking. They keep focusing on the physical color, not the mechanism of color change. \n\nA simple answer is that plants have hormones that affect it's physical state. Hormones act as signals to cells to make proteins, which in make the cell behave in different ways (depending on proteins diversity). One hormone involved in leaf color change is \"auxin\". There are more, but this hormone acts as a signal for genes in cells to make proteins that change the color of the leaf. Refer to other replies for what comprises these different colors (ie. chlorophylls). \n\nThe process is very complex, but it can be summarized as a series of stimuli that promote the making of auxin, which in turn promotes the change in color of a leaf. \n\nFor the sake of remaining simple, I'll leave my answer as it is. I think it should suffice. It is a very complex mechanism. There are different biological pathways that are associated with the process and can be learned more about here: \n\n_URL_0_ \n\n",
"It's also worth noting that fall leaves don't really die and fall off the tree. They are actually ejected by a process in the base of the stem and the tree branch. Many people think the leaf turns color because it's dead. To prove this false look at a branch that has broken off a tree in the summer, the leaves turn brown, and if you shake the branch they don't fall off. ",
"Yes, trees will always turn the same color. They actually don't change exactly. They are always that color. It's just that during healthier times, leaves are covered in a substance called Chlorophyll which happens to be green most of the time. What you're seeing in the fall is that chlorophyll dying off so that you can see the leaf's color under it. ",
"They don't change color, the color is already in the leaf. The overwhelming about of chlorophyll in the cells masks the brilliantly colored pigments. When the leaves stop producing food for the tree, the chlorophyl is no longer in use and the green color fades, revealing the new color. I would assume the new color is chosen by the varying amounts of pigments in the leaf",
"Why don't solar power/panels/chargers have green Chlorophyll in them then if most of our successful designs replicate Mother Nature in some way?\n\n",
"Each type of tree has different colors and each of those colors can vary with climate. A wet summer and fall the colors won't be as brilliant a dry summer and fall all the leaves will turn brown and fall off quicker. When you hit that perfect balance of rainfall through the summer and fall is when they are most brilliant. Source: I live with trees.",
"Mostly correct. However, chlorophyll is degraded by sunlight, and thus for the leaf to remain green, it must produce more. However, this process requires a temperature above a certain point, so when it gets colder, the leaf is unable to produce new chlorophyll, and thus leaves carotene and xanthophyll to 'color' the leaf\n\n(At least what we've been taught)",
"The truth is we don't really know!\n\nWhich is really pretty exciting!\n\nWe have a very good understanding why the leaves stop being green and fall off. That's very useful. The traditional explanation is those are the residual pigments like carotenoids, but that really isn't a very good explanation.\n\n A hypothesis has been presented that bright colors are signals to insects to display the tree's health and therefore ability to fend it off, but while the paper found support for that, it wasn't terribly strong, would need a lot lot lot more investigation.",
"I'm going to explain it the way my Mom did when I was actually five. It's the kids version, but I always think of it this time of year. \nGrowing up in New Hampshire we had \"leaf peepers\". They were what we called the retired folks from Massachusetts who came to take pictures of trees, covered bridges, and moose, all while trying not to drive into any trees, covered bridges, and moose. So being a five year old that liked stories, my mom would tell me that all leaves work really hard all year making oxygen to breath and the fall months were to celebrate the ones who worked the hardest. The colors were like medals and the brighter and more vibrant the tree, the better they did that year. I remember pointing trees out with her and saying, \"that one did really good this year!\" So that's why the colors would change and why so many people would come around to take pictures. They were there to find the best trees. ",
"Protein quantities decide what colour the leaf will remain during its life cycle, from birth to death - so for example if the ground soil is rich one year then the leaf will stay longer green as it captures more minerals. Sunlight and rainfall also make up the other variables in deciding how long and how fast the leaf stays alive. These variables also decide how the structure of leaf will develop. It's a long time since I did biology but that's my understanding. ",
"This topic forms part of the literature review in my PhD thesis. I'll try to make it as interesting as possible!\n\nWhat I find super interesting is that the electrons excited by chlorophyll will form radical oxygen species and damage the surrounding area (inside the plant cell) via oxidative stress. While the chloroplast is engaging in photosynthesis, these high-energy electrons are shuttled off down its electron transport chain (to make energy) however when the chloroplast starts being broken down (as in the leaf aging) the chlorophyll hasn't got anywhere to send the electrons so it's like a loose electrical power line attached to a solar panel and just fucks shit up around it. What's amazing is that the cellular machinery in the chloroplast closely resembles that of mitochondria (which power our cells by making energy). To combat the oxidative stress, the plant has enzymes to metabolise chlorophyll, which becomes a series of linear tetrapyrroles (bananas have a certain type that even fluoresces blue) and are themselves antioxidants. These are known as red-chlorophyll catabolite and yellow chlorophyll catabolite and they have the same chromaphore (the part of the molecule that absorbs light) as bilirubin.\n\nWhat blows my mind (if anyone is reading still) is that chlorophyll has a magnesium atom at its center, whereas heme (the Center of a haemoglobin protein which carries oxygen in red blood cells) which is made from the same precursor molecule as chlorophyll, has an iron atom at its center. Much like chlorophyll, unbound heme is toxic to our cells and has to be broken down by enzymes which metabolise heme into a series of linear tetrapyrroles which have potent antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects. They are called biliverdin (it's blue and it's responsible for making your bruises blue) and bilirubin (that's the yellow you see around the bruise and the yellow you see in jaundiced liver failure patients).\n\nI think it's so cool that the molecules and enzymes which plants use to make energy from sunlight (stored as glucose and oils aka chains of carbon) are so similar to the ones that allows us to deliver oxygen to cells along with the the chains of carbon so that our mitochondria can take the stored energy and react it with oxygen to make atp which power our own cellular machinery. \n\n Edit: Clarity",
"The pigments that are responsible for the oranges, yellows, and reds that we observe in leaves in the fall are called carotenoids. The reason leaves change color in autumn is because the chlorophyll start to die as the tree goes dormant for the winter. The reason the chlorophyll die and the tree goes dormant is because if it didn't the water in the leaves and tissues surrounding the area would expand as temperatures dip and the water starts to freeze; which would cause the cells to burst and damage the tree. After the chlorophyll have died and gone dormant all that remains are carotenoids! The reasons trees change color vary by species, but typically it's due to changes in the amount of day light, changes in temperature, also changes in spectrum of light.\n\nI hope this helps!",
"Each species of leaf has its \"real color\", which is red or yellow or brown. Each leaf is \"dyed green\" with chlorophyll; I mean that literally, chlorophyll is defined as a green dye. Chlorophyll is found in several plant tissues but it only does the sunlight powered sugar generation thing when it's inside special organelles called chloroplasts.\n\nWhen it gets cold and crappy out the trees break down the chlorophyll into sugars and stuff, and suck it out of the leaves to store it.\n\nOnce the green dye is gone you see the \"real color\" of the leaves.\n\nI don't know how much variation there is tree-to-tree within a species, I expect there is very little. But species to species the color is highly variable, while inside the species its pretty much one color.\n\nSo a particular breed of maple tree may turn very red, while a particular species of oak may be bright yellow.\n\nYear to year the color is pretty much the same, just as your skin color and mine remain consistent. We can both tan, dying our skin with extra melanin, but if we both spend a month indoors we will revert to the same colors we had before we got our tans as the melanin dye leaves our skin.\n\nBut since the breakdown of the chlorophyll makes the leaves into a useless extravagance, the tree quickly sucks the leaves dry and then drops them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://leafland.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Acer-rubrum-Red-Canadian-Maple.jpg",
"http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get2/I0000QWmHnBjAHBw/fit=1000x750/8932-4145-Western-Larch.jpg"
],
[],
[
"http://www.plant-biology.com/leaf-senescence-hormones.php"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
c8sv5h | why is it, with all of our technological advances, that we still don’t have cell service in all areas, especially pretty populated areas? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c8sv5h/eli5_why_is_it_with_all_of_our_technological/ | {
"a_id": [
"esphdyl",
"esq5t56"
],
"score": [
18,
2
],
"text": [
"Mainly, it's expensive to build more cell towers, and the companies that provide cell service don't see a need to spend more money on that.",
"It takes roughly 18 months start to finish to get a new cel tower put up due to legalities, contracting, setup, etc. and costs A TON of money. In a lot of cases, the rent on the land for the tower is exorbitant, Often times running $2-$10k/month/tower. And some places have laws governing how towers are setup (have to blend into nature, height restrictions, frequency restrictions, etc.) so there’s a lot that goes into just one tower."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
86rw0h | why is water able to evaporated below the boiling point? i was always taught 212f (100c) was when water could turn into a gas. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/86rw0h/eli5_why_is_water_able_to_evaporated_below_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dw7do84",
"dw7e1o9",
"dw7fic9"
],
"score": [
3,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Temperature is the average thermal energy of a bunch of stuff. Any individual molecule can have considerably more or considerably less energy. At any given time, a small fraction of the water molecules will have enough energy to move into the gas phase.",
"First let me say, if you have the time, ignore my answer and read the first chapter of the feynman lectures here: _URL_0_ Absolutely ELI5, great stuff.\n\nHere's my explanation.\n\nPeople found that liquid water is made of a huge number of tiny molecules. These attract and repel each other (too close and they repel, too far and they break, right in the middle, and they balance ... kind of like weak springs), and they're constantly moving and jiggling about.\n\nEvaporation is when the molecules on the surface, after some kick of energy from collisions below, break the last of their springs and bounce off into the air and just leave. And more and more leave like this, until poof, almost all are gone. So while temperature would affect it, it is not necessary for the water to be at boiling point. And you can imagine that different liquids evaporate at different rates based on the strength of those springy bonds.\n\nAnd temperature is nothing but the kinetic energy of these molecules. The higher the temperature, the more they kick around. \n\nBoiling is only a little bit different. It's not related to the water molecules on the SURFACE, but all around. Because you heated the water to such a high temperature that it just violently ejects water molecules all over the place, even inside (gas bubbles do form deep inside when you boil some water, right? Does that happen in evaporation? Nope.). And it's very easy for water to escape in the form of vapour.\n\nHope this cleared things up for you.",
"From your answers, it seems like you're looking for [vapor pressure](_URL_0_). When a liquid and gas phase exist together they will form an equilibrium where part of the liquid evaporates until it makes up a certain amount of partial pressure. \n\n[For water](_URL_1_) you see at 30°C its vapor pressure is 0.0419 atm. This means around 4% of the total air pressure is created by evaporated water. When the vapor pressure reaches 1 atm, bubbles of 100% water can be formed inside te liquid and the water starts boiling. \n\n**ELI5 recap:** there is always some evaporation at the surface, but only the boiling temperature new surfaces (bubbles) can be formed inside the liquid. \n\nAlso, note that humidity percentages are expressed in terms of vapor pressure. At 40% humidity, that doesn't mean 40% of the air is water, but that means that the partial pressure of water is 40% of its maximal vapor pressure. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_01.html"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vapor_pressure",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vapour_pressure_of_water"
]
] |
||
409qxf | law enforcement in usa | Why have so many state departments which cover a lot of the same areas.
I come from Aus and we have state police, federal police, border controls and ASIO.
America has State Police, Sheriffs department, Texas Rangers, ATF ,DEA, Highway patrol, border patrol, FBI, CIA, Homeland Sec.
Then within that there are specialist units within your police departments tasked with drugs when there is an entire agency to deal with it?
Wouldnt it be easier and cheaper to do without certain ones and combine agency resources?
Also why cant state police in pursuit of criminals cross state lines and continue til that states police are able to take up chase instead of just stopping? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/409qxf/eli5_law_enforcement_in_usa/ | {
"a_id": [
"cysjeg1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"There are 15 times as many people who live in the US than in Australia. So it's reasonable that they would need more agencies to cover more issues.\n\nState police can pursue you over state lines, they don't just stop chasing you when you cross the state line."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
7a2tbq | why aren't police departments footing the bill instead of the tax payers when it comes to court settlements? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7a2tbq/eli5_why_arent_police_departments_footing_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dp6mtvx",
"dp6n1bn"
],
"score": [
20,
12
],
"text": [
"Most police departments are taxpayer funded. Where do you think the money is going to come from?",
"They're not private businesses with stockholders and investments you can take. Police departments have no money **other than** taxpayer money. The police **are the government**. There's not a lot of sensible ways to make them pay without it, somehow, coming from taxpayers.\n\nIf you try making officers personally liable, nobody will do the job unless we raise their salaries enough to cover insurance for potential lawsuits and that *takes taxpayer money too*."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
41xtq6 | why don't animals or humans decompose in a bog? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/41xtq6/eli5why_dont_animals_or_humans_decompose_in_a_bog/ | {
"a_id": [
"cz61chp",
"cz61n88"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"There's so little oxygen in that kind of environment that the bacteria and small animals required to make the bodies decompose simply can't live.",
"Because bogs are generally acidic and anaerobic. These conditions are not conducive to many types aerobic organisms that are normally involved in biodegradation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
35z63e | the success of works of art such as mark rothko's | [Just read that one of his paintings sold for 46,5 million dollars.](_URL_0_) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35z63e/eli5_the_success_of_works_of_art_such_as_mark/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr995c7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Colour field paintings basically stemmed from the idea that colour can provoke emotion, and quite powerful feelings at that. I think a lot of people are attracted to these works subconsciously for that reason."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.businessinsider.com/afp-rothko-painting-sells-for-46.5-million-in-ny-auction-2015-5"
] | [
[]
] |
|
36ghvx | do we drill for oil to manufacture plastics, or are they made from the byproducts of oil refinement? | Or in other words, are we contributing to the depletion of oil reserves by the ubiquitous use of plastics, or are they simply a novel way of making use of millions of tonnes of what would otherwise simply be waste products of fuel and gasoline production? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/36ghvx/eli5_do_we_drill_for_oil_to_manufacture_plastics/ | {
"a_id": [
"crdstxs",
"crdt4bs"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The refining process churns out a bunch of random shit. There's a neat picture [here](_URL_1_) that shows how different products are pulled out of crude oil at different temperatures. Plastics can be made from various refined products, but they're just not a significant use of oil overall: just 2.9% of crude use in the US goes to plastic production, [according to the EIA](_URL_0_). So no, plastics aren't a significant driver of oil demand.",
"Most Plastics are made from the waste products of refining the various fuels that we use, though some are made directly from crude oil. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=34&t=6",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_refinery#Operation"
],
[]
] |
|
nm3sf | how does santa deliver toys to all the boys and girls in the world in one night? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/nm3sf/eli5_how_does_santa_deliver_toys_to_all_the_boys/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3a5lho",
"c3a5rwp",
"c3a5sxm",
"c3a636c",
"c3a6ceq",
"c3a6hr8",
"c3a6iey",
"c3a6pfn",
"c3a6s1z",
"c3a6sk9",
"c3a6u0d",
"c3a6zn0",
"c3a73hq",
"c3a7467",
"c3a77es",
"c3a7ciq",
"c3a7gbz",
"c3a7nm0",
"c3a7qkm",
"c3a81fl",
"c3a82vi",
"c3a89yq",
"c3a8b1j",
"c3a8vbp",
"c3a8xsj",
"c3a989c",
"c3a9d5r",
"c3a9fl8",
"c3a9gyj",
"c3a9k0i",
"c3a9p2o",
"c3aa4n4",
"c3aablu",
"c3aaks0",
"c3aarbt",
"c3aazpk",
"c3ab0mx",
"c3ab0zp",
"c3abw4l",
"c3ac8nh",
"c3acll1",
"c3acp1s",
"c3ag2ko",
"c3a5lho",
"c3a5rwp",
"c3a5sxm",
"c3a636c",
"c3a6ceq",
"c3a6hr8",
"c3a6iey",
"c3a6pfn",
"c3a6s1z",
"c3a6sk9",
"c3a6u0d",
"c3a6zn0",
"c3a73hq",
"c3a7467",
"c3a77es",
"c3a7ciq",
"c3a7gbz",
"c3a7nm0",
"c3a7qkm",
"c3a81fl",
"c3a82vi",
"c3a89yq",
"c3a8b1j",
"c3a8vbp",
"c3a8xsj",
"c3a989c",
"c3a9d5r",
"c3a9fl8",
"c3a9gyj",
"c3a9k0i",
"c3a9p2o",
"c3aa4n4",
"c3aablu",
"c3aaks0",
"c3aarbt",
"c3aazpk",
"c3ab0mx",
"c3ab0zp",
"c3abw4l",
"c3ac8nh",
"c3acll1",
"c3acp1s",
"c3ag2ko",
"c4p21ue"
],
"score": [
798,
67,
2,
968,
57,
26,
29,
2,
2,
2,
712,
2,
84,
8,
3,
28,
19,
22,
3,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
16,
2,
2,
14,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
798,
67,
2,
968,
57,
26,
29,
2,
2,
2,
712,
2,
84,
8,
3,
28,
19,
22,
3,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
16,
2,
2,
14,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"magic.\n\nnow back to bed. ",
"People are so worried about CERN and it's supercollider forming a black hole... Did they ever stop to think this fat man with his thousands of tons of toys zipping around the world at 10,000 feet/sec might cause quite the cosmic event? \n\nI think it's more likely that your parents are actually Santa's elves and he just mails them the toys. ",
"C'mon man...he took the freeway!\n\n_URL_0_",
"You know how 1 year is like 7 to a dog? Well one night is like 1 year to Santa.",
"It has to do with time zones.",
"Inverse-Palahniuk ending: in the end it turns out Santa is actually a bunch of different people. ",
"If your day is gone and you want to ride on: Cocaine.",
"time zones, obviously. he has more than 24 hrs to deliver them all over the world.",
"Magic dust. A little bit for the reindeer, a little bit for Santa Claus, a little bit more for Santa Claus, a little bit more…",
"I don't know how Santa does it, but I Death explained how the Hogfather does it: \n > AH, BUT WE ARE NOT IN THE WORLD, said Death. WE ARE IN THE SPECIAL\nCONGRUENT REALITY CREATED FOR THE HOGFATHER. NORMAL RULES HAVE\nTO BE SUSPENDED. HOW ELSE COULD ANYONE GET AROUND THE ENTIRE\nWORLD IN ONE NIGHT? ",
"1. No known species of reindeer can fly. But there are 300,000 species of living organisms yet to be classified, and while most of these are insects and germs, this does not completely rule out flying reindeer, which only Santa has seen.\n\n\n\n2. There are 2 billion children (under 18) in the world. But since Santa doesn't appear to handle Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and Jewish children, that reduces the workload to 15% of the total - 378 million or so. At an average rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each. \n\n\n\n3. Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with thanks to time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west. This works out to 822.6 visits per second. This is to say that for each Christian household with good children, Santa has 1/1000th of a second to park, hop out of the sleigh, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings, distribute the remaining gifts under the tree, eat the snacks, get back up the chimney, get back in the sleigh, and move on to the next house. Assuming that each of these 91.8 million homes are distributed evenly (which we know to be false but for the sake of these calculations we will accept) we are now talking about .78 miles per household, a total trip of 75 1/2 million miles, not counting bathroom stops. This means that Santa's sleigh is traveling at 650 miles per second, 3000 times the speed of sound. For comparison, the fastest man made vehicle, the Ulysses space probe moves at a poky 27.4 MPS; the average reindeer runs at 15 MPH.\n\n\n\n4. The sleigh's payload adds another interesting element. Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium sized LEGO set (about 2 pounds), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons not counting Santa, who is inexorably described as overweight. On land, conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that 'flying reindeer' (see point one) could pull TEN TIMES the usual amount, we cannot do the job with 8 or even 9, we need 214,000 reindeer. This increases the weight, not even counting the sleigh, to 353,430 tons. Again for comparison this is 4 times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth 2.\n\n\n\n5. 353,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance. This will heat the reindeer in the same manner as a spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of reindeer will absorb 14.2 QUINTILLION joules of energy. Per second. Each. In short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing the next pair of reindeer, and creating deafening sonic booms in their wake. The entire team will be vaporized within 4.26 thousands of a second. Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times the force of gravity. A 300 pound Santa would be pinned to the back of his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force.\n\n\n\n6. Conclusion: If there was a Santa, he's dead now\n\n > lost original source, anyhow have it? \n\n**edit:** thanks to manvsfriction for the link to snopes [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)",
"He stops fuckin' time, man. Stops. Time.",
"Santa actually exists in 10-dimensional spacetime. This allows him to travel in other dimensions that are \"folded up\" too small to \"see\" for normal people. Imagine an ant traveling on a wire. It can go back and forth and around the wire, but it has no concept of \"up\" or \"down\" since his motion is constrained. So too are we constrained to only see our three spatial dimensions. Santa has six more dimensions to play with, and so by traveling neither up, nor down, nor left, nor right, nor forward, nor backward, but rather \"Santaward\" he can, in fact, visit all children in one night. \n\nIt's a little-known fact that prior to 1879, Santa could only visit homes with chimneys. However, due to the spread of the common flush toilet, Santa could enter other homes through the vent on the roof. He doesn't actually travel through the toilet, he just needs a path without solid matter so he doesn't interact with mass shadows in the other dimensions. ",
"He doesn't. The modern conception of Santa Claus is a cultural myth invented by corporations in order to promote the increasing commercialization of Christmas.",
"What if Santa is the reason why we lose our keys, or misplace our shoes, or a dead battery in the morning and the 25th is just his apology.",
"Santa gives all the presents to the mommys and daddys throughout the year for them to help him put under the tree and on Christmas he delivers the ones that were last minute wishes to the especially good boys and girls.",
"Let's look at the scriptual evidence of Santa.\n\n > He sees you when you're sleeping\n\n > He knows when you're awake \n\nSo from this we can see that Santa can only see you when you are\nsleeping. He only *knows* that you are awake. This points to Santa\nliving in the dream dimension, Dreamworld. When you enter his realm through a dream he can see you. When you are awake, not present in Dreamworld, he notices this. \n\nAnother evidence for this it that we know he lives at the North pole, yet numerous visits there has revealed nothing. No elves, no reindeer tracks, nothing. Of course not! Santa lives at Dreamworld North pole. He's clearly a dimension traveler, and can travel in and out \nof our dimension, perhaps using some advanced reindeer technology.\n\n > He's making a list\n\n > And checking it twice;\n\n > Gonna find out Who's naughty and nice\n\nThis seems to be in conflict with the later:\n\n > He knows if you've been bad or good\n\nHe's going to find out what he already knows? Seems weird, but only if we look at time as a one-way street. It is simple. Santa can travel in time. That is the only way he can both know and not know if you've been a good kid or not.\nOn his first visit, in your dreams, he's making the list, that later let's him know if you are present worthy or not.\n\nSo how does he deliver toys to all good boys and girls? Easy for a multi-dimensional time-traveler that has a list of kids who only dream good dreams.",
"Santa represents a spirit. The spirit of giving. The reason why we say \"Santa\" is so I can give you a gift and you don't have to know it came from me. I'm not giving you a gift because I want you to feel guilty, responsible, or that you need to return the favor. I want to give a gift because I want you to have it, regardless of where it came from.\n\nSt. Nicholas taught us to give like that. So if I want to give to you but I do not want you to feel that you need to return the favor, I'll tell you it's from Santa.\n\nDon't sweat it. It's the time for giving, and the story of Santa Claus teaches us the value of unreciprocated giving.\n\n(this explanation does start with a five year old and drives towards an adult)\n\nedit: just cleaning up some poorly written text. I was drunk.",
"Santa travels at the speed of light. he is able to use quantum principles to essentially un-make the present(gift) molecules from his sled and re-make them into your home. This is a very energy inefficient process, so santa needs to harvest solar power for 364 days out of the year to actually be able to do this. The rest of the energy is spent driving a sled in a spiral pattern along with the rotation of the earth at relativistic speed. Since he is traveling so fast, time in front of him gets super compressed while time behind him becomes decompressed. Taking advantage of the fact that you are stuck on earth at a single speed, santa is able to use the super compressed space-time continuum to deliver presents at an exeedingly fast rate while space-time behind him slows to a crawl. The total space time distortion has an equilibrium of about 6-12 hours, though since he is traveling along with the rotation of the earth (longitudinally while the earth spins, like a printer head) he technically stays in the same 1 minute block along his length of travel.\n\nOnce we discover the method he used to contain a black hole and then create and contain said black hole, we'll be able to accomplish similar feats, but until then santa's technology remains exclusive and proprietary. And we cant even call him a selfish bastard.",
"[isn't it obvious?](_URL_0_)",
"He has a TARDIS obviously.",
"As you approach the speed of light time slows down, he does that. : > ",
"He doesn't. Your parents or guardians do. Life is real, get used to it, kid.",
"Copious amounts of cocaine",
"[Santa Claus is a Time Lord.](_URL_0_)",
"Santa is actually the head of a vast, extensive conspiracy. He has millions of operatives, with at least one in every town where Christmas is celebrated. His operatives are the ones who place the gifts under the tree. The myth that he comes down through every chimney himself is meant to represent how his operatives are doing his work on his behalf. You're not supposed to see them, though. Keeping their identities secret allows them to operate freely. If you see an operative, you won't get Santa presents ever again.",
"Come on, guys. He's 5. It's time to tell him the truth.",
"Santa Claus is an [X-man.](_URL_0_) \n\nHe uses his [mutant](_URL_4_) powers and stolen alien technology to bring joy to human and mutant children every Christmas.\n\nSanta's mutant powers are similar to those of [Jamie Madrox](_URL_8_), \"the Multiple Man,\" from [X-Factor](_URL_3_).\n\nSanta, like Madrox, can make instant duplicates of himself. However, Santa's powers don't work quite the same as Madrox's:\n\n* Madrox's duplicates create their own mass out of nothing. Santa's duplicates steal some mass from Santa's own body when they're created-- that's why Santa's fat, the dude eats constantly to gain body mass so he can make more copies of himself.\n\n* Madrox's duplicates are physically perfect copies, but different aspect of Madrox's psyche maybe dominant in each duplicate. Santa's duplicates all share Santa's psyche-- love children, make the world better through the joy of Christmas, etc. However, Santa's duplicates aren't perfect physical copies, and the \"error rate\" in those copies is variable. . .\n\n* Santa can make tens of thousands, perhaps even millions of copies of himself. However, as the total number of active Santa-copies increases, the quality goes down. New copies become shorter-lived and have a higher error rate; They look less and less like the original Santa Claus. Thus, in December, Santa floods the world with low-quality Santa duplicates that are so divergent they need to wear disguises to resemble the original Santa Claus. \n\n* Those December Santas do the best they can, but it hurts their feelings when kids point out that they look funny. The December Santas can't help it, they were born that way. Still, they spread out around the world, \nlistening to children, bringing holiday cheer to malls and parties, and of course, managing gift delivery within their local territory on Christmas Eve. Then, on December 26th, they go \"poof\" and become one with the original Santa Claus again. \n\nThen there's the alien technology:\n\n* Santa's sleigh is a disguised courier ship from the alien [Kree Empire](_URL_9_). The sleigh has a hyperspace engine and an on-board pocket dimension that holds all the toys. On Christmas eve, the original Santa pilots the sleigh around the world, popping in and out of hyperspace just long enough to drop off a load of presents and a crew of super-low quality duplicates. There are so many Christmas Eve duplicates that they can't even be full-size (Santa doesn't have enough body mass). Sightings of the mini-dupes gave rise to the legend of Santa's elves. The local December Santas meet each toy drop and lead teams of elves on deliveries. \n\n* Santa's reindeer are an honor guard of [Inhumans](_URL_2_). Like the famous [Lockjaw](_URL_1_), exposure to the lunar Terrigen Mists have mutated them to such a degree that they no longer appear human, or even bipedal. However, like Lockjaw, the proud members of the Reindeer Guard can teleport, making them the perhaps the only living beings who can keep up with Santa's sleigh-ship as it pops in and out of hyperspace. Rudolph, the leader of the Reindeer Guard, has a secondary mutation that enables him to *always* find his way, even through fog, blizzards, or the fierce positron storms in hyperspace. \n\n* You may ask, \"Why doesn't Santa Claus go public? This inspiring story of mutant generosity could do wonders to help human-mutant relations!\" Well, there's a problem. . .The aliens want their courier ship back. It was a unique prototype, and every year alien agents from the Kree and [Skrull](_URL_5_) empires try to catch Santa and steal back the sleigh! The Kree and Skrull hate each other, and the sleigh-ship would give a huge advantage to whichever side possessed it-- enough to start an interstellar war. So keep your eyes peeled! Kree can build human-looking androids, and some [Skrulls can shape-shift](_URL_6_); you never know who might be an alien. Be suspicious of *anyone* who asks too many questions about Santa Claus and his Christmas Eve ride. Some grown-ups will try to tell you that there is no Santa Claus-- don't worry, that's just a cover story. The grown-ups love Santa and want to keep him safe from the alien spies. Play along, and once you're home, call [S.W.O.R.D.](_URL_7_) to report suspected alien agents.\n\nMerry Christmas!",
"he is massively forking himself into the brains of parents ",
"One word: cloning. Hey, I see a movie here.",
"Fucking Santa: How does it work?",
"This is gonna get buried, but oh well.\n\nMy college engineering professor actually did some research on this and got on the Discovery channel for it.\n\n[His website on Santa](_URL_0_)",
"Fuckin aliens, man.",
"he is a timelord",
"Simple. He gets everyone's parent's to help.",
"[Allow me to explain](_URL_0_)",
"I don't want to say it's aliens.....\n\nBut Santa is an ancient alien",
"My dad once explained that Santa must be a quantum being. He's capable of moving infinitely quickly and of being in multiple places at once. Makes sense.",
"Magic School Bus\nETA: 5 mins to class, \nCurrent Location: at the earths core, \nUpdate: 4m 59 sec later sitting in class about to discuss geography. \nWho do you think gave Ms. Fizzle the Magic for her school bus? Le Santa. ",
"Oh boy. At least you didn't go to 4chan with this ",
"Santa torrents all the presents now and the parents download them from the secret Santa server. Unfortunately this will all end once Santa's workshop is shut down by SOPA.\n\ntl;dr SOPA will kill Christmas.",
"St Nick, Santa Claus, Kris Kringle, and all those other names for Santa are actually different people with different toy-delivery jurisdictions. Divide and conquer.",
"He skips Africa and Asia.",
"magic.\n\nnow back to bed. ",
"People are so worried about CERN and it's supercollider forming a black hole... Did they ever stop to think this fat man with his thousands of tons of toys zipping around the world at 10,000 feet/sec might cause quite the cosmic event? \n\nI think it's more likely that your parents are actually Santa's elves and he just mails them the toys. ",
"C'mon man...he took the freeway!\n\n_URL_0_",
"You know how 1 year is like 7 to a dog? Well one night is like 1 year to Santa.",
"It has to do with time zones.",
"Inverse-Palahniuk ending: in the end it turns out Santa is actually a bunch of different people. ",
"If your day is gone and you want to ride on: Cocaine.",
"time zones, obviously. he has more than 24 hrs to deliver them all over the world.",
"Magic dust. A little bit for the reindeer, a little bit for Santa Claus, a little bit more for Santa Claus, a little bit more…",
"I don't know how Santa does it, but I Death explained how the Hogfather does it: \n > AH, BUT WE ARE NOT IN THE WORLD, said Death. WE ARE IN THE SPECIAL\nCONGRUENT REALITY CREATED FOR THE HOGFATHER. NORMAL RULES HAVE\nTO BE SUSPENDED. HOW ELSE COULD ANYONE GET AROUND THE ENTIRE\nWORLD IN ONE NIGHT? ",
"1. No known species of reindeer can fly. But there are 300,000 species of living organisms yet to be classified, and while most of these are insects and germs, this does not completely rule out flying reindeer, which only Santa has seen.\n\n\n\n2. There are 2 billion children (under 18) in the world. But since Santa doesn't appear to handle Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and Jewish children, that reduces the workload to 15% of the total - 378 million or so. At an average rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each. \n\n\n\n3. Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with thanks to time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west. This works out to 822.6 visits per second. This is to say that for each Christian household with good children, Santa has 1/1000th of a second to park, hop out of the sleigh, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings, distribute the remaining gifts under the tree, eat the snacks, get back up the chimney, get back in the sleigh, and move on to the next house. Assuming that each of these 91.8 million homes are distributed evenly (which we know to be false but for the sake of these calculations we will accept) we are now talking about .78 miles per household, a total trip of 75 1/2 million miles, not counting bathroom stops. This means that Santa's sleigh is traveling at 650 miles per second, 3000 times the speed of sound. For comparison, the fastest man made vehicle, the Ulysses space probe moves at a poky 27.4 MPS; the average reindeer runs at 15 MPH.\n\n\n\n4. The sleigh's payload adds another interesting element. Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium sized LEGO set (about 2 pounds), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons not counting Santa, who is inexorably described as overweight. On land, conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that 'flying reindeer' (see point one) could pull TEN TIMES the usual amount, we cannot do the job with 8 or even 9, we need 214,000 reindeer. This increases the weight, not even counting the sleigh, to 353,430 tons. Again for comparison this is 4 times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth 2.\n\n\n\n5. 353,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance. This will heat the reindeer in the same manner as a spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of reindeer will absorb 14.2 QUINTILLION joules of energy. Per second. Each. In short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing the next pair of reindeer, and creating deafening sonic booms in their wake. The entire team will be vaporized within 4.26 thousands of a second. Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times the force of gravity. A 300 pound Santa would be pinned to the back of his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force.\n\n\n\n6. Conclusion: If there was a Santa, he's dead now\n\n > lost original source, anyhow have it? \n\n**edit:** thanks to manvsfriction for the link to snopes [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)",
"He stops fuckin' time, man. Stops. Time.",
"Santa actually exists in 10-dimensional spacetime. This allows him to travel in other dimensions that are \"folded up\" too small to \"see\" for normal people. Imagine an ant traveling on a wire. It can go back and forth and around the wire, but it has no concept of \"up\" or \"down\" since his motion is constrained. So too are we constrained to only see our three spatial dimensions. Santa has six more dimensions to play with, and so by traveling neither up, nor down, nor left, nor right, nor forward, nor backward, but rather \"Santaward\" he can, in fact, visit all children in one night. \n\nIt's a little-known fact that prior to 1879, Santa could only visit homes with chimneys. However, due to the spread of the common flush toilet, Santa could enter other homes through the vent on the roof. He doesn't actually travel through the toilet, he just needs a path without solid matter so he doesn't interact with mass shadows in the other dimensions. ",
"He doesn't. The modern conception of Santa Claus is a cultural myth invented by corporations in order to promote the increasing commercialization of Christmas.",
"What if Santa is the reason why we lose our keys, or misplace our shoes, or a dead battery in the morning and the 25th is just his apology.",
"Santa gives all the presents to the mommys and daddys throughout the year for them to help him put under the tree and on Christmas he delivers the ones that were last minute wishes to the especially good boys and girls.",
"Let's look at the scriptual evidence of Santa.\n\n > He sees you when you're sleeping\n\n > He knows when you're awake \n\nSo from this we can see that Santa can only see you when you are\nsleeping. He only *knows* that you are awake. This points to Santa\nliving in the dream dimension, Dreamworld. When you enter his realm through a dream he can see you. When you are awake, not present in Dreamworld, he notices this. \n\nAnother evidence for this it that we know he lives at the North pole, yet numerous visits there has revealed nothing. No elves, no reindeer tracks, nothing. Of course not! Santa lives at Dreamworld North pole. He's clearly a dimension traveler, and can travel in and out \nof our dimension, perhaps using some advanced reindeer technology.\n\n > He's making a list\n\n > And checking it twice;\n\n > Gonna find out Who's naughty and nice\n\nThis seems to be in conflict with the later:\n\n > He knows if you've been bad or good\n\nHe's going to find out what he already knows? Seems weird, but only if we look at time as a one-way street. It is simple. Santa can travel in time. That is the only way he can both know and not know if you've been a good kid or not.\nOn his first visit, in your dreams, he's making the list, that later let's him know if you are present worthy or not.\n\nSo how does he deliver toys to all good boys and girls? Easy for a multi-dimensional time-traveler that has a list of kids who only dream good dreams.",
"Santa represents a spirit. The spirit of giving. The reason why we say \"Santa\" is so I can give you a gift and you don't have to know it came from me. I'm not giving you a gift because I want you to feel guilty, responsible, or that you need to return the favor. I want to give a gift because I want you to have it, regardless of where it came from.\n\nSt. Nicholas taught us to give like that. So if I want to give to you but I do not want you to feel that you need to return the favor, I'll tell you it's from Santa.\n\nDon't sweat it. It's the time for giving, and the story of Santa Claus teaches us the value of unreciprocated giving.\n\n(this explanation does start with a five year old and drives towards an adult)\n\nedit: just cleaning up some poorly written text. I was drunk.",
"Santa travels at the speed of light. he is able to use quantum principles to essentially un-make the present(gift) molecules from his sled and re-make them into your home. This is a very energy inefficient process, so santa needs to harvest solar power for 364 days out of the year to actually be able to do this. The rest of the energy is spent driving a sled in a spiral pattern along with the rotation of the earth at relativistic speed. Since he is traveling so fast, time in front of him gets super compressed while time behind him becomes decompressed. Taking advantage of the fact that you are stuck on earth at a single speed, santa is able to use the super compressed space-time continuum to deliver presents at an exeedingly fast rate while space-time behind him slows to a crawl. The total space time distortion has an equilibrium of about 6-12 hours, though since he is traveling along with the rotation of the earth (longitudinally while the earth spins, like a printer head) he technically stays in the same 1 minute block along his length of travel.\n\nOnce we discover the method he used to contain a black hole and then create and contain said black hole, we'll be able to accomplish similar feats, but until then santa's technology remains exclusive and proprietary. And we cant even call him a selfish bastard.",
"[isn't it obvious?](_URL_0_)",
"He has a TARDIS obviously.",
"As you approach the speed of light time slows down, he does that. : > ",
"He doesn't. Your parents or guardians do. Life is real, get used to it, kid.",
"Copious amounts of cocaine",
"[Santa Claus is a Time Lord.](_URL_0_)",
"Santa is actually the head of a vast, extensive conspiracy. He has millions of operatives, with at least one in every town where Christmas is celebrated. His operatives are the ones who place the gifts under the tree. The myth that he comes down through every chimney himself is meant to represent how his operatives are doing his work on his behalf. You're not supposed to see them, though. Keeping their identities secret allows them to operate freely. If you see an operative, you won't get Santa presents ever again.",
"Come on, guys. He's 5. It's time to tell him the truth.",
"Santa Claus is an [X-man.](_URL_0_) \n\nHe uses his [mutant](_URL_4_) powers and stolen alien technology to bring joy to human and mutant children every Christmas.\n\nSanta's mutant powers are similar to those of [Jamie Madrox](_URL_8_), \"the Multiple Man,\" from [X-Factor](_URL_3_).\n\nSanta, like Madrox, can make instant duplicates of himself. However, Santa's powers don't work quite the same as Madrox's:\n\n* Madrox's duplicates create their own mass out of nothing. Santa's duplicates steal some mass from Santa's own body when they're created-- that's why Santa's fat, the dude eats constantly to gain body mass so he can make more copies of himself.\n\n* Madrox's duplicates are physically perfect copies, but different aspect of Madrox's psyche maybe dominant in each duplicate. Santa's duplicates all share Santa's psyche-- love children, make the world better through the joy of Christmas, etc. However, Santa's duplicates aren't perfect physical copies, and the \"error rate\" in those copies is variable. . .\n\n* Santa can make tens of thousands, perhaps even millions of copies of himself. However, as the total number of active Santa-copies increases, the quality goes down. New copies become shorter-lived and have a higher error rate; They look less and less like the original Santa Claus. Thus, in December, Santa floods the world with low-quality Santa duplicates that are so divergent they need to wear disguises to resemble the original Santa Claus. \n\n* Those December Santas do the best they can, but it hurts their feelings when kids point out that they look funny. The December Santas can't help it, they were born that way. Still, they spread out around the world, \nlistening to children, bringing holiday cheer to malls and parties, and of course, managing gift delivery within their local territory on Christmas Eve. Then, on December 26th, they go \"poof\" and become one with the original Santa Claus again. \n\nThen there's the alien technology:\n\n* Santa's sleigh is a disguised courier ship from the alien [Kree Empire](_URL_9_). The sleigh has a hyperspace engine and an on-board pocket dimension that holds all the toys. On Christmas eve, the original Santa pilots the sleigh around the world, popping in and out of hyperspace just long enough to drop off a load of presents and a crew of super-low quality duplicates. There are so many Christmas Eve duplicates that they can't even be full-size (Santa doesn't have enough body mass). Sightings of the mini-dupes gave rise to the legend of Santa's elves. The local December Santas meet each toy drop and lead teams of elves on deliveries. \n\n* Santa's reindeer are an honor guard of [Inhumans](_URL_2_). Like the famous [Lockjaw](_URL_1_), exposure to the lunar Terrigen Mists have mutated them to such a degree that they no longer appear human, or even bipedal. However, like Lockjaw, the proud members of the Reindeer Guard can teleport, making them the perhaps the only living beings who can keep up with Santa's sleigh-ship as it pops in and out of hyperspace. Rudolph, the leader of the Reindeer Guard, has a secondary mutation that enables him to *always* find his way, even through fog, blizzards, or the fierce positron storms in hyperspace. \n\n* You may ask, \"Why doesn't Santa Claus go public? This inspiring story of mutant generosity could do wonders to help human-mutant relations!\" Well, there's a problem. . .The aliens want their courier ship back. It was a unique prototype, and every year alien agents from the Kree and [Skrull](_URL_5_) empires try to catch Santa and steal back the sleigh! The Kree and Skrull hate each other, and the sleigh-ship would give a huge advantage to whichever side possessed it-- enough to start an interstellar war. So keep your eyes peeled! Kree can build human-looking androids, and some [Skrulls can shape-shift](_URL_6_); you never know who might be an alien. Be suspicious of *anyone* who asks too many questions about Santa Claus and his Christmas Eve ride. Some grown-ups will try to tell you that there is no Santa Claus-- don't worry, that's just a cover story. The grown-ups love Santa and want to keep him safe from the alien spies. Play along, and once you're home, call [S.W.O.R.D.](_URL_7_) to report suspected alien agents.\n\nMerry Christmas!",
"he is massively forking himself into the brains of parents ",
"One word: cloning. Hey, I see a movie here.",
"Fucking Santa: How does it work?",
"This is gonna get buried, but oh well.\n\nMy college engineering professor actually did some research on this and got on the Discovery channel for it.\n\n[His website on Santa](_URL_0_)",
"Fuckin aliens, man.",
"he is a timelord",
"Simple. He gets everyone's parent's to help.",
"[Allow me to explain](_URL_0_)",
"I don't want to say it's aliens.....\n\nBut Santa is an ancient alien",
"My dad once explained that Santa must be a quantum being. He's capable of moving infinitely quickly and of being in multiple places at once. Makes sense.",
"Magic School Bus\nETA: 5 mins to class, \nCurrent Location: at the earths core, \nUpdate: 4m 59 sec later sitting in class about to discuss geography. \nWho do you think gave Ms. Fizzle the Magic for her school bus? Le Santa. ",
"Oh boy. At least you didn't go to 4chan with this ",
"Santa torrents all the presents now and the parents download them from the secret Santa server. Unfortunately this will all end once Santa's workshop is shut down by SOPA.\n\ntl;dr SOPA will kill Christmas.",
"St Nick, Santa Claus, Kris Kringle, and all those other names for Santa are actually different people with different toy-delivery jurisdictions. Divide and conquer.",
"He skips Africa and Asia.",
"when you go really really really fast, time slows down around you, and you move in slow motion, so if santa is going super dee duper fast, one night lasts 10 years for him. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoSyCtD0WO4"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.snopes.com/holidays/christmas/santa/physics.asp"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/AIZGF.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://drawingpower.wordpress.com/2011/08/26/santa-claus-is-a-time-lord/"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Men",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockjaw_%28comics%29",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inhumans",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Factor_Investigations",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutants_%28Marvel_Comics%29",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skrull",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Invasion",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.W.O.R.D._%28comics%29",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamie_Madrox",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kree"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.mae.ncsu.edu/silverberg/santa/santa.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lk8evdSSas1qjtfpzo1_500.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoSyCtD0WO4"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.snopes.com/holidays/christmas/santa/physics.asp"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/AIZGF.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://drawingpower.wordpress.com/2011/08/26/santa-claus-is-a-time-lord/"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Men",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockjaw_%28comics%29",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inhumans",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Factor_Investigations",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutants_%28Marvel_Comics%29",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skrull",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Invasion",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.W.O.R.D._%28comics%29",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamie_Madrox",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kree"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.mae.ncsu.edu/silverberg/santa/santa.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lk8evdSSas1qjtfpzo1_500.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
u8ez1 | how does one get data off of a computer/phone/technological device after it's been deleted? | And I guess the derivative of that is: Why can data be retrieved after it has been "deleted"? (If the answer is purely technical I wouldn't mind). | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/u8ez1/how_does_one_get_data_off_of_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4t6zsw",
"c4t8r9g"
],
"score": [
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Oftentimes when you think you're deleting the data, you're simply deleting the references to the data, not the data itself.\n\nThink about a library. Imagine you want to get rid of a book. What most computers do it simply remove that book's card in the card catalog. But, the book itself is still on the shelves if you know where to look.\n\nThe reason they do this is that it's way faster than going to where the file is stored and setting all of the bits to 0. This process is sometimes called \"wiping\" or \"secure erasing\". You can get specialty programs that will do this, but it's not built in to most systems.",
"People associate the word \"delete\" with \"erase\", but that's not the case with non-volatile memory. \n\nWhen data is \"deleted\", it's simply marked by the device as \"this data isn't in use anymore, it can be overwritten later\". When the device needs to write new data, it may or may not write over the \"deleted\" sectors. \n\nData can be securely deleted with applications that go back and overwrite the existing data with zeros or random data. However, this is a time-consuming process, and is generally unnecessary. \n\ntl;dr: Actually erasing data takes time, so it's usually just marked as \"okay to overwrite\" by devices. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
5hxyg8 | the shift away from 3d and vividly colored graphics to flatter more geometric designs. | Examples include: the Xbox 360 to Xbox 1, Windows 7 to Windows 8/10 and IOS 6 to 7. There are many other company's logos(Such as Instagram) and graphics that also seem to have been following the same tend over the last few years. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5hxyg8/eli5_the_shift_away_from_3d_and_vividly_colored/ | {
"a_id": [
"db3tglk",
"db3ver1",
"db3yfym"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Because the market decided it was tacky. Sleek, simplified, and modern is proven to be better received. Take a look at [iOS 6 vs 7](_URL_0_), the older design just seems worse by comparison.",
"When a technology is new, it's used extensively and taken to its limits. After it ages, the gimmick of it fades away and is then removed.",
"I'm pretty sure there is precedent in psychology that I can find but I think it relates to us wanting to make these things as simple as possible so we don't have to think about it at all. You want a person to use your phone with as little work as possible and then you want them to forget that they used it until they need it again. You spend and entire day looking at a phone screen and you don't even realize that you spent a whole day. Also, I would guess that at this point Apple and Microsoft spend millions of dollars researching these products to get a sense of what people are looking for in a interface.\n\nThe sort of minimalist aesthetic that is really big now has been around for a while. Its that whole sleek Northern European IKEA vibe"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ios6_ios7_home_screens.jpg"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
ecgcxo | why do kids become attached to blankies? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ecgcxo/eli5_why_do_kids_become_attached_to_blankies/ | {
"a_id": [
"fbb5hj2",
"fbca0xe"
],
"score": [
6,
5
],
"text": [
"It’s not just a blanket. Lots of people get emotionally attached to other inanimate objects. Usually it is a blanket or a toy of some kind. Stuffed animals are common as well. I don’t know the actual reasoning behind it though. It usually has something to do with security, like they feel more comfortable when holding it. It’s almost like they feel naked without it or perhaps defenseless. \n\nI’d almost say it’s the same sensation as if you had lost your phone or felt anxious or worried when you couldn’t find your phone or purse or wallet. Not the exact same principle, but similar in a way.",
"Mammals have a physiological bonding response to warm, furry objects. Usually this is other mammals, especially our mothers and close family members, but we can have the same response with inanimate objects as well. Skin-to-skin contact causes the release of the hormone *oxytocin* which causes feelings of safety, comfort, and love. This process is so important that human babies who do not receive regular hugs from somebody can actually *die*. They discovered this during WW2 when there were these big orphanages in London with hundreds of babies being cared for by just a few nurses. Some of the quieter babies who didn't cry and fuss too much actually died, because they weren't being picked up and hugged by the nurses enough. Lack of skin-to-skin contact can cause the medical condition of [failure to thrive](_URL_0_).\n\nSo little kids can become emotionally attached to blankets or stuffed animals, because embracing those objects causes that release of oxytocin, creating the feelings of safety, comfort, and love. Yes, they could get this release from any blanket, but even as an adult, you probably have at least a minor attachment to blankets and clothes you're familiar with, right? They feel familiar and recognizable to you. Kids feel the same way. They want the stuff they're familiar with rather than some new and potentially unfamiliar stuff."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failure_to_thrive"
]
] |
||
56iirx | why does downloading new software such as ios10 on my phone cause a noticeable decrease in battery life? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/56iirx/eli5_why_does_downloading_new_software_such_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8jjqkn",
"d8jtd7v"
],
"score": [
2,
12
],
"text": [
"Basically the phone has to run through more code, keeping it running heavily for longer to figure out what it needs to do. ",
"Hi.\n\nAll of these responses are from people who sound like (and judging from post histories) have no idea how software design works, so I'm going to throw something in here.\n\nWhen you write code for ONE device, ONE configuration, you and your team can likely do a pretty damn good job of making it work optimally on the hardware. This much is very easy to understand IMO.\n\nNow, what happens when you start piling on new features on that OS? Well, assuming you still only have one config, you can still do reasonably well, depending on what the new feature needs to do.\n\nBut, Apple doesn't have one config. Each year they add support for new configurations with new hardware in the new iDevices. Okay, now here is where keeping performance top notch gets tricky. As you have to start to generalize your code to work well on more configurations (maybe with some device specific code paths) and pray that your compiler teams can do the rest of the work in terms of generating optimal code for each device, keeping the same performance and battery life gets 100x harder. Do also note that Apple has the best mobile hardware support in the industry. Most Android phones lose support after around 2 years. Apple supports their devices for 4+ years.\n\nNow, if Apple did absolutely nothing and kept piling on new features and configurations to support, the old devices would be entirely unusable. However, Apple is working around this by pushing out multiple versions of iOS, for various configurations. Generally this means various features being flipped off in code to maintain reasonable performance and battery life. But even then, it's very difficult to maintain perfect performance and battery life from day 1 as you become more and more distanced from that original code, feature set and configuration."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2mtn8p | why do some foods make you "bring it to a boil" only to immediately have you turn it down to a simmer? why not just simmer it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mtn8p/eli5_why_do_some_foods_make_you_bring_it_to_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm7h6zd",
"cm7imwn"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Because that's how you can be sure that the water is the right temperature for simmering without having to measure. To simmer means to cook something at a temperature just below boiling, where bubbles are still forming but the water is not vaporizing. To get to that point, it's easiest to first go up to boiling and then work your way down until you're just slightly above the temperature at which bubbles stop forming.",
"In addition to what /u/boredgamelad wrote, it's also important for certain starches and thickeners to get to a certain temperature before they'll work. That temperature is frequently near boiling.\n\nOne such ingredient is cornstarch. According to the link below, it needs to be brought to 203 degrees for it to \"work.\" It's easier to make sure you get to 203 by going all the way to boiling (~212), than it is using a thermometer. \n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.exploratorium.edu/cooking/icooks/10-06-03.html"
]
] |
||
6gxhe5 | what are the psychological reasons behind seeing and/or formulating conspiracy theories? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6gxhe5/eli5_what_are_the_psychological_reasons_behind/ | {
"a_id": [
"ditvzyd",
"ditwzkp",
"ditxy0t",
"diu604t",
"diujfwh"
],
"score": [
14,
2,
17,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Humans like to find patterns, even and especially where there aren't any.\n\nThe reason for this goes all the way back to the beginnings of our evolution. If you are a savanna-dwelling hunter and you don't notice a pattern of moving grass in the distance, you get eaten by the lion. If you do notice it and it was actually the wind, nothing bad happens to you. Therefore, we evolved to sometimes notice things that aren't even there on the off chance that it helps us notice when something is there.\n\nOf course now we don't have lions in the grass to worry about. But our brains don't know that, so instead we sometimes find absurd patterns in the news that don't actually point anywhere.",
"Some people feel that they are not very special. But they want to feel special. Instead of developing a talent like drawing they decide that they can see patterns that other people cannot see. That makes them feel special.",
"Here's a couple posts from a recent askreddit thread I read a while back that provide some good insight:\n\nposted by thinkofanamefast\n\n* \"Conspiracy theories also seem to be more compelling to those with low self-worth, especially with regard to their sense of agency in the world at large. Conspiracy theories appear to be a way of reacting to uncertainty and powerlessness. If you know the \"truth\" and others don't, that’s one way you can reassert feelings of having agency,” Swami says. It can be comforting to do your own research even if that research is flawed. It feels good to be the wise old goat in a flock of sheep.\" \"In 2010, Viren Swami and a co-author summarized this research in The Psychologist, a scientific journal.\"\n\n\nposted by FreshCircuit\n\n* The most obviously ignorant people are the ones who over simplify complicated models. They do this in hope that the world can make simple sense. Unfortunately the world is massive and chaotic, and a huge percentage of outcomes are primarily due to chance. It is often at this boundary that our most clever of individuals have their ignorant moments. And it is when they refuse to let go that we see anybody can become ignorant.\nWhile this is obvious in hindsight, it hurts to admit that any intelligent person can get locked in their own ideal conclusion given certain circumstances. None of us are perfectand thus none of us are immune. Even moreso when we prefer to use simple models for truths.\n",
"Most of the time everything goes fine and you don't notice anything. It's just a normal day. But on a rare occasion, they mess up. We see them. And then the race is on. Because we can't unsee them and not know the truth, but they know if what we know gets out then the whole thing will be blown wide open! That's why we have to keep moving, don't trust anyone. You already know too much. I gotta go. ",
"In Addition to what others have said about pattern recognition, as a highly developed social species, humans relate to others using a \"theory of mind.\" In other words, we are always aware that others have a \"mind\" that acts and thinks independently of our own. This helps us survive as a social primate. It also serves as a lense through which we relate to the world. This is why we used to attribute natural events to the conscious acts of supernatural beings. Conspiracy theory is a combination of an overactive pattern recognition system combined with an assumption of a conscious mover. Of course, sometimes it's really a conspiracy. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
e42mtq | what happens if you go straight up in space, no stopping, will you run into anything? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e42mtq/eli5_what_happens_if_you_go_straight_up_in_space/ | {
"a_id": [
"f96gyms"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Almost certainly not, however gravity from the Earth and other objects will pull you towards them. There is a lot more space then there are objects to hit."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9ndl9t | how do lung x-rays work, if you can only see bones with an x-ray? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ndl9t/eli5how_do_lung_xrays_work_if_you_can_only_see/ | {
"a_id": [
"e7lhyck",
"e7lhyld",
"e7li1uw",
"e7liui4",
"e7lj2xi"
],
"score": [
3,
10,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There are a few things. First you don’t only see bone in an x-ray. Bone is much easier to see as it is dense and absorbs more x-rays, but the rest of your body absorbs some as well. \n\nNext you can use contrast material. A liquid is given to the subject, for lungs it would need to be injected. The contrast material would be something that absorbs more x-rays than normal tissue. This makes it easier to see the tissue. ",
"X-rays show a lot more than bone! They show density of everything inside of you. Bones are the thick and easy to get a nice X-ray of but all your organs show up as different types of shadow. Lungs are made of a thin tissue and should be full of air so you can’t see them on X-ray very well when you’re healthy. But that makes it easy to spot when something other than air is in your lungs such as fluid when you have pneumonia or tumors if you have cancer. ",
"In part it’s because our x-ray machines are pretty sensitive. While X-rays go straight through most soft tissue there is still a little bit of absorption, which can be seen on the pictures. If you’ve got a lump of denser tissue then that will still show up, albeit faintly, because it’s not the same as the empty space inside of the rest of your lungs. (It’s also great at catching if it’s something else inside your lungs causing the problem)\n\nThat said it’s certainly possible for things like certain types of tumors to be difficult to detect with X-rays. That’s why X-rays are only one tool that doctors use to diagnose things, because it can help catch certain things even if it doesn’t give a perfect picture.",
"X-rays can show you a lot more than bone. Sure, bones show up really well on x-ray, but you can also see the tissue around it as a shadow. Air tends to show up as black, fluid as a very dark grey, soft tissue (muscles, fat ect) as a lighter grey, bones as white and metal as an even brighter white. When we take a chest x-ray, we can alter the focus of the x-ray beam like a camera to focus on the lungs so the ribs are slightly faded, and basically of the lungs arent black and full of air, we can tell something's not right. You can also tell from the position of the heart (at least in animals) if there's something like a pneumothorax, because it'll move all the stiluff in the chest to the side. You also get calcification of the lung tissue sometimes, due to chronic irritation/tuberculosis, which basically means you have tiny specks of bony tissue there. Someone earlier mentioned using a dye, and while we do do that for some things (better highlighting the gut/bladder), we generally don't use it in the lung for x-rays, though it's pretty common in CT scans. This generally makes the blood vessels stand out.",
"It's sorta because of that, that X-Rays help. If you X-Ray the area and find something other than ribcage showing up in there you know something's off. Also it's not exactly an on/off switch. The X-Rays are stopped by dense materials, so something like say a cancerous tumour would show up as well."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7p8cht | why do soda 12-packs come in a 2x6 can box and beer 12-packs seem to always come in 3x4 can boxes | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7p8cht/eli5_why_do_soda_12packs_come_in_a_2x6_can_box/ | {
"a_id": [
"dsf9ssk"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"A long time ago, soda 12-pack boxes were sold in 3x4. But soda manufacturers realized that if they made the long box, that you could put the [box in your fridge and use it as a soda can dispenser](_URL_0_). This must have lead to an increase in sales of 12 packs, because easier access to cold beverages likely increases consumption. Why beer manufacturers have not adopted this strategy, who knows. Note, the volume of the 2x6 configuration is larger than the volume of the 3x4 configuration because they leave extra space to ensure the top cans push the bottom cans out - so bottlers consume more volume to ship 2x6 format than 3x4, meaning less product is shipped."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://vimeo.com/42401073"
]
] |
||
ydazb | why don't they make mid/rear engine front wheel drive cars? | I understand it's impractical, but what exactly makes it so unreasonable to make an RF or MF car? I'm talking in depth technical reasons. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ydazb/why_dont_they_make_midrear_engine_front_wheel/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5uiju0"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"When you accelerate, centre of gravity moves backwards. Rear mounted engine makes front wheels light - no weight equals low friction. Front mounted engine places weight above drive wheels, helps transfer power to road, whilst also using less drivetrain and cost.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5sb0q8 | why is red eyes in pictures not as big of a problem as it used to be? | With more selfies being taken than 10 years ago why do I never see red eyes in pictures anymore? Every photo editor used to come with a red eye fixer, but it doesn't seem as common anymore. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5sb0q8/eli5why_is_red_eyes_in_pictures_not_as_big_of_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dddnsp1",
"dddpsb9"
],
"score": [
7,
4
],
"text": [
"A selfie generally doesn't use a flash. Flash photography, especially from a flash that is positioned directly next to the lens, is still very much a problem for red-eye.",
"Now that most cameras are digital, most pictures aren't taken using a flash. (It is the flash that causes red-eye, by taking the picture at the same moment it exposes the subject to a bright light, before their pupil has had time to respond. The red you see is literally the blood vessels in the retina.)\n\nSmarter cameras do a little mini-flash before the main flash, which causes the pupil to dilate before taking the picture."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
62lyxw | if the air scatters all the colours away so we can only see the blue light, why doesnt looking through *more* air at sunset look more blue? | I've never quite grasped this one, why the air seems to have different effects on wavelengths when I look through different amounts of it. I would have expected it to have the same effect only in greater intensity when I look at something through more air. Can anyone please explain? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/62lyxw/eli5_if_the_air_scatters_all_the_colours_away_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfnk7bd",
"dfnkqyq"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Good thinking, but... it's the other way around. The colour that gets scattered the most is blue. That's why the air is predominantly blue. The blue comes from all directions (is scattered the most). Now, when light passes through more air, there is no blue left, and only the least scattered ones (red) reach you eye. ",
"So what you are referring to is Rayleigh Scattering. Basically it accounts for the way specific wavelengths get reflected in the atmosphere so we can see them. Longer wavelengths (your reds and yellows) do not get reflected as frequently as your shorter wavelengths (blues and violets). However the sun does not produce much violet light, so we see more blue color. \n\nNow we will not see 'more' blue from more air, because the intensity comes from the source (the sun is already pretty bright) of the color. The hue may change depending on the time of day and the scattering of the different wavelengths are in the greatest majority. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
119u4y | the potential scottish independence from the uk. both sides (pro/con) and the history of the issue. (curious american). | Title really summarizes the idea of this thread. I first heard of this issue today on the frontpage and I am really curious on to how this issue came to be. I would love to see discussion on how the independence from the UK would be beneficial or detrimental to Scotland. Thank you!
EDIT: Please don't downvote opinions that are against your own. The point of this thread is to inform, and both views do exactly that.
EDIT^2: Wow, thank you victoriacakes for that excellent summary. It seems like it could really go both ways, and I can understand why it's such a touchy subject. However, there are still 2 years ahead of us and a lot of things can change, I would love to see more dialogue and more interpretations. Thanks everyone! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/119u4y/eli5_the_potential_scottish_independence_from_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6kpkpl",
"c6kps13",
"c6ks6o6",
"c6ktz4b"
],
"score": [
4,
21,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"There is a great video on YouTube (sorry for no link) on the history of how Scotland ended up joining with England to form the UK. Basically they wanted colonies when everyone in Europe was getting them and they spent all their national wealth trying to create a colony in Panama which failed for the same reason most equatorial colonies failed (wrong climate for European crops plus tropical diseases). After that it was in their national interest to join the UK mostly for economic reasons. \n\nNot sure why they would want independence now. ",
"You are not going to get an ubiased answer because the facts about the potential consequences aren't really known, so right now a lot of people are just making up things that they would like to be true and cherry-picking sources to support that.\n\nFrom an economic standpoint, pro-union people say that this would suck for Scotland because Scotland would have to re-apply to join the EU and be forced to join the Euro. They also say the oil will run out soon and Scotland won't be able to subsist on oil forever. The basic idea is that Scotland will be a lot poorer and worse off if they are independent, in addition to which they will have less political power because they will become a small, mostly irrelevant, country.\n\nPro-independence people say that they won't have to rejoin the EU since they are already part of the EU, they won't have to take the Euro if they don't want to, that they will do well from their other industries and tourism etc and not just oil. That they won't be poor and won't be worse off without the UK.\n\nIt's pretty much impossible to predict what would happen, since for every source you can provide supporting one side of the issue you can get another equally valid source stating the opposite. Anyone insisting to you that their prediction is the only correct one is simply trying to get you to agree with their bias.\n\nFrom an ideological perspective, many pro-independence people feel that they are \"ruled from the South\" and that they aren't duly represented in parliament, which is not unreasonable when you consider the two parties Scotland gave the most votes to in the 2010 general election were Labour and the Scottish National Party, and it's the Tories/Lib Dems who are actually in power in the UK (Scotland historically hates the Tories). So the UK government is actually the complete opposite of how most Scots would like it to look. A lot of people believe that Scotland will do better governing itself than being governed by people that they don't support and didn't vote for. \n\nFrom the other side, unionists might say that they think Scotland is better off as part of a union in a powerful country than being a smaller, marginalised country. That our last Prime Minister was Scottish and that Scotland already gets enough of its own autonomy via the Scottish Parliament. And as well that the Scottish can't expect more representation than they already have considering they only have 5 million people to England's 53 million.\n\nCulturally, there are some people that think Scottish culture is a completely separate thing to English/British culture, and they don't feel \"British\" and as a result don't feel any need to be part of a union. On the other hand, England/Scotland have been together for a long time and have shared a lot of culture over that time and there are plenty of people who don't feel alienated from \"British culture\", whatever that may be. \n\nOf course, not everyone who has chosen a side would agree with the stances I've given as examples for their side, but imo these are the things that come up most commonly in debates.\n\nHistorically, the modern day movement began when oil was discovered in the North Sea. Basically, a lot of people got the idea (right or wrong) that if they left the UK and didn't have to share the prosperity in the oil, Scotland could be a lot better off and support itself. At the time Scotland was having some economic problems, i.e. industries were moving away and leaving a lot of poor people behind in their wake. So the idea of an independent Scotland living off oil riches was pretty tantalising. From then on it's been a growing movement, and led to the creation of the Scottish Assembly and a lot of devolution in government.\n\nAs an aside, there are also plenty of people in Scotland who buy into the whole Braveheart-\"FREEDOM!\" thing and just hate England because it's how they've been brought up and it's how all their friends think and they haven't really thought about it further than that. And there's probably a lot of people who will vote no because they are afraid of change. ",
"If Scotland votes for independence, will the UK let them have it? \n\nAlso, is there any significant separatist movement in other areas of the UK? Will there ever be a time when the UK is just England?",
"There is at least one factor that the scots aren't considering right now.\n\nThe Major Countries of the EU are trying to arrange for the creation of a European Army and joint Foreign Ministry. The UK is very against this and as a result those countries will probably attempt to force the UK out of the EU.\n\nHere are a few likely possibilities to consider.\n\n1. Since the UK will almost assuredly be forced to leave due to their position/popular opinion, ascertaining what Scotland's position will be in the EU will be a lot more difficult than they currently expect. Particularly, if the split has already happened before independence has been voted on.\n\n2. Without the UK there, Scotland will likely have to reapply to the EU and likely forced to adopt the Euro (as a condition of acceptance). This goes counter to what they are currently expecting and I don't think they have thoroughly considered what this would mean to their new economy.\n\n3. No matter what way you look at it, going independent would play havoc with their ability to trade. Either relations become sour and England makes freight transit more expensive for them, or they are forced to ship everything. Not to mention that whatever monetary policy they put in place would dramatically change how their economy functions. Whatever the case, England's exclusion from the EU would adversely affect international trade (because EU based trade agreements would seize to have any merit or power). This would directly hamper Scotland even in the best case scenario.\n\n4. Scotland would be required to buy into the European Army/Foreign Ministry idea. Not only would this be handing a large portion of their recently gained sovereignty back to the EU, but they would be required to pay into the concept.\n\n5. The creation of a European Army would disturb NATO's balance of power. This would have a large effect to the international relations of all members. If the U.S. decided to carry on with what is left of the non EU-NATO and leave the EU to their designs, then the EU would likely ramp up military spending to fill the gaps. Suddenly, not only does Scotland have to pay the EU to take their military/diplomatic sovereignty, but they have to pay A LOT more.\n\n6. The diplomatic/trade agreements that the UK has in place would not carry over to Scotland. As a result, beneficial deals with the UK (a major power) would not be as beneficial to Scotland, adding more drag to the economy.\n\n7. As has been mentioned before, Scotland would get a share of the debt according to their population (~10% of the total UK debt).\n\n8. A lot of the contention in the oil situation is that the oil industry is based in Aberdeen and that gives the image that all north sea oil is Scotland's. However, according to the rules of international laws regarding to territorial waters, in a fair redistribution, the UK would have rights to everything south of the Fulmar Oil Field [Pic](_URL_0_). Which is about 9% of the Central and North regions of the North Sea Oil. This would also entitle England to ALL of the South region of the North Sea, which accounts to almost all of the Natural Gas in the UK territorial waters and over 74% of the NG in the North Sea [pic](_URL_1_).\n\n That's without getting into grittier details like the fact that Scotland doesn't have territorial waters and that England can successfully argue for an unfair new territorial boundary that could entitle it to another 8 or 9% share of the Central and North regions of the North Sea. This unfair share has a large Methane Hydrates reserve which would put England in a better resource position as the technology develops to extract that resource in the next decade (the amount of MH in that unfair share is about 40% of the North Sea total volume.\n\n Lastly, as the infrastructure to extract those resources is in large part a property of the UK, England might decide it wants to be paid back its share of the infrastructure. If that is so, the sticker shock might give Scotland some grey hairs (we're talking about tens of billions in USD). If it doesn't outright charge Scotland it will probably demand a share of the resources it extracts. How would Scotland feel if anywhere between 5 and 20% of their new oil went directly to London? (for anywhere from 5 years to the lifespan of the oil platforms)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.acorn-ps.com/web/image/content/map/nns_map.jpg",
"http://www.acorn-ps.com/web/image/content/map/sns_map.jpg"
]
] |
|
3gu453 | why when i'm trying to fall asleep do i begin reliving cringe-worthy moments in my past? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gu453/eli5_why_when_im_trying_to_fall_asleep_do_i_begin/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu1h8lp",
"cu1imq5",
"cu1ncpc",
"cu1nnzl",
"cu1p70v",
"cu1ppi9",
"cu1q74t",
"cu1qpa9",
"cu1rb2q",
"cu1s3q5",
"cu1ssjq",
"cu1uxwm",
"cu1x8pj",
"cu211xi",
"cu22cun",
"cu22ias",
"cu24vsi"
],
"score": [
1273,
36,
7,
49,
24,
13,
2,
9,
5,
4,
3,
5,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There are lots of reasons - one of the primary ones being that in our history as humans, avoiding pain was a much higher priority than seeking pleasure as pain. So it makes sense that our subconsciousness tends to focus on negatives rather than positives, especially as back when evolutionary pressure was at its highest on humans, something like a broken leg likely meant death. You can see this phenomenon playing out in people who are highly risk averse, even when the risk is small and the rewards are potentially great (making career moves, dating moves, etc).\n\nAs long as you reproduce, your DNA doesn't care how pleasurable your life is. Pain inhibits your ability to reproduce far more than pleasure helps it, or least that was the case back when evolutionary pressure was stronger for us and natural selection was ruthlessly weeding out unfavorable traits.\n\nAs for why you're focusing on social shame, when it comes to questions of the subconscious, the rule of thumb is to look back at what your concerns would have meant for a caveman. Back in the tribal days, if you were not accepted by your tribe, it meant you were far less likely to reproduce - and not only that, but if you weren't accepted by your tribe it was overwhelmingly likely that you would never be accepted by anyone as most people lived and died exclusively with the tribe they were raised in.\n\nAlso, your subconscious is smart enough to know what things are important for you to resolve. This does not mean that every thought pattern is beneficial - only that you can gain insight about how to proceed by analyzing your thought patterns. Your subconscious seems burdened by some bad memories and is bringing them up again in order to encourage some type of action on your part. That action is for you to decide, and there are professionals who can help you with that if you decide you want to do that.",
"I've found that I always have these sessions when I feel, consciously or subconsciously, that something in my life isn't going the way that I would like. That can be something going poorly at work, having trouble with a personal relationship, weighing a little more than I'd like, or whatever. Usually I haven't done anything about it or am trying not to think about it too much. However, when things are going well, or when I'm actively trying to improve my situation, I find that I don't have those kinds of sessions.\n\nI'm not a scientist or a doctor, but I suspect it has something to do with brain chemistry. When I'm down, that feeling tends to reinforce itself. When I'm up, I don't feel like my brain is trying to bring me down.\n\nRegardless of whether or not I'm right, the solution seems consistent. If you try to reflect on what might be bothering you and actively improve whatever that is, I'll bet you'll experience this less.",
"so I'm not the only one who struggles with this? Good to know...",
"Wow, you only take 10 minutes to fall asleep? Lucky.",
"I'm a recovering heroin addict and I was at my wort about 6 year ago and did a lot of really bad things, things I'm not proud of and when I'm trying to fall asleep that's when I find I remember all the bad things I have done during that time... my counselor says it's about guilt and not being able to forgive myself.. it really sucks because I'm not that person anymore but I can't seem to let go of it - It comes up constantly when I'm trying to sleep and only then",
"Because you give a shit. Stop giving a shit. Nobody remembers it, so why should you?",
"We are used to being over stimulated due to smart phones and social media which can cause anxiety. If you lay in a dark room with little noise and close your eyes, your body withdrawals from the high level of stimulation and anxiety. Your brain attempts to wean you from this by recalling situations of anxiety and stress until you drift off to sleep. \n\n\nI made this up but it sounds plausible. ",
"From childhood's hour I have not been\nAs others were; I have not seen\nAs others saw; I could not bring\nMy passions from a common spring.\nFrom the same source I have not taken\nMy sorrow; I could not awaken\nMy heart to joy at the same tone;\nAnd all I loved, I loved alone.\nThen- in my childhood, in the dawn\nOf a most stormy life- was drawn\nFrom every depth of good and ill\nThe mystery which binds me still:\nFrom the torrent, or the fountain,\nFrom the red cliff of the mountain,\nFrom the sun that round me rolled\nIn its autumn tint of gold,\nFrom the lightning in the sky\nAs it passed me flying by,\nFrom the thunder and the storm,\nAnd the cloud that took the form\n(When the rest of Heaven was blue)\nOf a demon in my view.\n\nAlone By Edgar Allan Poe",
"Your guards are being lowered as you let go of consiousness. Come to terms with that shit, think about it so hard, and in so many ways, that it's nothing; just another story. It's hurting you even when it's not hurting you, if that makes sense. Best to nip that shit in the bud instead of planting a shrub to cover it up. ",
"None of these replies quoted any sources, at least not at the time of my posting of this comment.",
"Because you haven't overcome them and dealt with them emotionally, they come up until you're done and over them.",
"I am not sure if you are looking for a solution to the above, but allow me to explain how you can fall to sleep much faster while also reducing the amount of night time compulsive thinking. Simply put your attention(consciousness) is being absorbed completely by thought, thoughts create emotions in the body which can make it hard to sleep. \n\nIn order to fall asleep much faster and with much less thought, try the following: When laying down for bed, focus your attention on your body and also your breathing (you can research this further yourself) I like to do a \"body scan\" where you focus your complete attention on the tips of your toes and then follow the sensation throughout every part of your body, placing your attention on the body gives you a very peaceful feeling, stops your mind from thinking, and allows you to fall sleep quickly with much less thought to get in the way. For more information read \"The Power of now\"\n\nHope this helps someone",
"I used to do this A LOT. To the point where I would physically shutter randomly through the day when my mind just directs me to these thoughts, even mid conversation with a friend. I just kept telling myself that it's in the past and no one is thinking about them anyway so stop wasting my thoughts and be happy with who you are at the present. I could safely say I don't get those thoughts anymore!",
"And the number 1 thing not to read when you're trying to fall asleep.... This post\n\nThanks OP, just spent 30 minutes relieving some crazy shit.",
"This same question, or slight variations on it, is asked every day on this subreddit. Each day it seems to be on the front page.",
"From a neuroscience point of view. When you fall asleep your brain begins storing new memories in the form of connections. For whatever reason (biochemical/ neurobiological) some connections are strengthened, some are weakened. Events that induce an immediate and powerful emotional response tend to create the strongest memories. What we call PTSDs are actually aberrant memories that can incite panic attacks and severe disphoria. \n\n\nIn your case, your brain stored these emotional events because they were terrible and you obsessed over them. It's the brain's way of adapting to the environment. \"Hopefully you don't repeat that series of events, because you remember what happened, right?\"\n\n\nOn a brighter side, not all pairings have to be bad. Smell is a powerful sense and is easily paired with memories. Personally, I had a specific air freshener next to my computer one summer and anytime I smell (fake) watermelon, I immediately start thinking about playing Oblivion. \n\n\nSource: I am a neuroscientist. This is just part of common knowledge in the field.",
"Because your life is nothing but a sad and awkward parody of a real life?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5xu4i2 | taking a second mortgage out on a home or property. | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5xu4i2/eli5_taking_a_second_mortgage_out_on_a_home_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"dekuwad",
"dekv46y",
"dekv79s",
"dekvavx"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In brief: They are a secured loan, which means they use the borrower’s home as security. If you fail to pay back your loan they'll come after your house.",
"Say you bought a home for $500,000 and paid $100,000 down, so your 'first' mortgage is $400,000. Now it's 20 years in, and you still owe $200,000 on your 'first' mortgage, but your home is now worth $800,000. You could borrow against that equity - $800k less the $200k you still owe is a $600k asset you can borrow against. Now they won't approve a $600k loan, but that's how people 'take out a second' for kitchen remodels, etc.",
"No, it costs more money in the long run... but it frees up access to asset value if you need cash. For example, let's say you own a house worth $300k. You bought it for $200k, and put down $40k down payment. You've also been paying down the mortgage, so your equity a this point is, say, $200k. So you could take out a second mortgage where you borrow against that equity (provided that you keep 20% equity in the house) to use for an addition/remodel to the house, or a down payment on a rental property, or to finance a business. But you'd now have the existing first mortgage to pay ( no difference in that payment), and in addition the second loan for the amount borrowed on the second mortgage. And both loans would be using the house as collateral. ",
"It is a second loan on the property. For example: The house is worth $200,000. You owe $125,000 on a primary mortgage and have $75,000 in equity (the part that you own). You decide to take a second mortgage (or home equity line of credit: HELOC) for $30,000. You now have $45,000 in equity and $30,000 in cash. Because it is a secured loan, the $30,000 is at 5% interest. If you don't pay it back, they can take your house and wreck your credit. A credit card is an unsecured loan so the interest rate is 20%. If you don't pay it back, they just wreck your credit."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1yz2c2 | how are athletes so much faster and better then compared to 10+ years ago? | How is it in 1988 the fastest 100 meter was a 9.79 with the use of steroids but 26 years later, Usain Bolt runs a 9.58 clean? What changes have been made to make athletes better? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1yz2c2/eli5_how_are_athletes_so_much_faster_and_better/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfp1vy6",
"cfp2t1o"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"It's a good question, but Usain Bolt is not a very good example. Bolt is peerlessly bioemechanically engineered for running, there is simply no other human is this world who can come close to him. His height, the length of his legs, the size of his feet, even the placement his achilles tendon is simply perfect. He is and will be the finest runner in maybe decades. You are absolutely right that athletes are better and faster than before, and I think most of that is due to science and better equipment. Carbon fiber as a lighter material than glass fiber. Better nutrition than earlier, and basically more performance based research. Maybe some of it is due to evolution, but I don't think that's nearly enough for it to be interesting.",
"Different running techniques. Lighter clothing and shoes. Better diets. Even the track they run on is made to make you \"bounce\" so your momentum is conserved a little more then running in concrete or an older track. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
j2o7z | explain to me please, like i'm 5, what the hell is going on in the movie primer. | Cause that shit's *confusing*! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j2o7z/explain_to_me_please_like_im_5_what_the_hell_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"c28n4vz",
"c28n66z",
"c28n6so"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
13
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_ The best I can do.",
"Way too tired to explain but this handy diagram should help \n\n_URL_0_\n\nIf you havent watched it at least 3 times then no words said here should aid you :)",
"I can't explain it like you're five. If that means I should be downvoted, I'll take it with good grace, cause I really don't know the rules here yet.\n\nBut I *can* explain it to you like you're a grad student in modern theoretical physics.\n\nThe source of the drama in *Primer* is the main characters' misunderstanding of how the universe works. When they first realize what their machine is doing — it's creating closed timelike curves, in the only bit of actual magic in the whole story — they assume the universe is strictly Einsteinian. You might have seen mention in the last few days about that experiment that confirmed special relativity; it was described in the press as being yet more evidence of the impossibility of time travel. That's because in a strictly Einsteinian universe, different observers will disagree on whether two events are simultaneous or not, but given any sequence of events all observers will agree on the *order* in which those events happened. Effects, in other words, can't ever *precede* their causes.\n\nSo the main characters in *Primer* build this machine that creates closed timelike curves. A closed timelike curve — which is *not* magic, by the way, but rather an especially exotic part of the theory of general relativity — is kind of like walking around the block. You walk out of your house, go along a path in one direction, then at a later time end up at the same place you started from. Except along a closed timelike curve, you return to both the same place *and time* you started from.\n\nSo they build time machines, and go back a day, and make money on the stock market. Along the way, they're careful not to mess with anything, because they assume the universe is Einsteinian; effects can't precede causes.\n\nExcept it turns out they're wrong. That's the tipping point of the whole story; the main characters think strict causality holds in our universe, when in fact it really doesn't. You *can* change the \"past\" … which isn't really the past at all, since in your frame of reference it hasn't happened yet.\n\nAnd the whole story we see on screen is of these two characters thinking they have it all figured out, and then abruptly realizing they don't, and how they deal with that.\n\nI said \"the story we see on screen\" deliberately. The remarkable think about *Primer* is that there are two whole movie's worth of stuff that happens *off-screen.* I'm talking now about the Granger incident, and the party.\n\nAbout halfway through the movie, Granger — Abe's sort-of girlfriend's dad — appears *out of freaking nowhere.* He's traveled back in one of the boxes; that much is obvious. Which one? We're never told. From when? We're never told. Why? We're never told. It's an event that, in the context of the movie we see, is completely *acausal.* It has no cause. Which is our first clue that the world the movie takes place in doesn't behave the way we thought it did. Which is what provokes Abe to go use his failsafe box. In the beginning — again, we see *none* of this; it's just alluded to — Abe set up a box and locked it away, before ever doing anything else. This is so he could, at some indefinite time in the future should the need arise, go back to *before* anybody started using the time machines and reset the world. (Even then, Abe suspected that their universe wasn't strictly causal.) It's the Granger incident that inspires Abe to do this.\n\nExcept what does Abe find when he goes back? He finds that *Aaron has beat him to it.* Aaron found Abe's failsafe box, used it himself, then set up his *own* failsafe box that he could use to get around Abe if Abe ever decided to use his own failsafe. Which he did, so Aaron did, which is why when Abe goes back he finds that Aaron has already been through that day at least once, recorded all his conversations and is now reading them back from his earpiece.\n\nAnd why did Aaron go back? The party. Which, again, is barely even alluded to in the movie, except for a few expository lines of narration. There was a party, something bad happened. Maybe somebody got hurt, or even killed. Aaron went back on his own, in secret, to fix it. To change it — because by this point, Aaron knows the world is not strictly causal. Except he didn't get it right the first time. Or the second. How many times did he go through that party, trying to make it all okay? Ten? A hundred? We don't know. We aren't told, nor are we shown. We're expected to figure it out from context and implications.\n\nIt's not until Abe pulls his own failsafe lever that things change. Abe discovers that Aaron has been living the same day over and over again, countless times, and Aaron recruits him to help him with the party. They do, with the understand that after that, the whole time-travel business is *over.*\n\nExcept not really. Because at the end of the movie, we see that *one of* the Aarons who now exists simultaneously with the others has gone off to France, and is building a new time machine. One the size of a house. For what reason, we can't even guess…"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://xkcd.com/657/"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Time_Travel_Method-2.svg"
],
[]
] |
|
18x6e6 | why can humans live longer now than we could, say, 500 years ago? | What changed? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18x6e6/why_can_humans_live_longer_now_than_we_could_say/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8is3f9",
"c8is3ld",
"c8isbma",
"c8iscb8",
"c8j613l"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
5,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"Advances in medicine. Vaccination, hygiene, and aseptic techniques are big factors why people don't die out as quickly as before.",
"Medicine, in detecting, preventing, and curing diseases, has improved.",
"If you aren't at risking of starving to death, getting killed in a war, or dying from simple injuries like a cut or a broken bone, you'll live a lot longer. \n\nModern medicine, agriculture, sanitation, and infrastructure all go a long way to prolonging the average human life.",
"Humans *don't* live longer than we did back then. *Life expectancy* is longer *on average* now, but that's not the same thing as saying people can live longer now.\n\nLook at it this way. Imagine that most people who live to adulthood die at the age of seventy. It would be fair to say, then, that human beings can live about seventy years. Some longer, some less, but the limit to how long a person lives is *around* seventy years.\n\nBut what if one person out of two dies in childhood?\n\nIn that case, the *average life expectancy* would only be about forty or so. Because half the population would die at a young age … even though everybody who *didn't* die at a young age would live to seventy years, plus or minus a couple.\n\nAnd that's been the case pretty much throughout all of recorded history. A human being who *doesn't die young* will live *approximately* seventy years. Plus or minus a bit. But over time, as societies have changed, it's become less (or in some cases, more) likely for people to die for some reason before reaching their dotage. Infant mortality, dangerous lifestyles of the young and fit, et cetera, et cetera. This causes the *average life expectancy* to trend upward, as we get better and better, both individually and in social groups, of not dying young.\n\nBasically, the story of a human life is this: If *nothing kills you,* you'll live to be *about* seventy years, give or take a bit. But if something kills you, you'll die sooner than that. Over the course of recorded history, the overall trend has been toward *fewer* people being killed young … but the human lifespan is not significantly different from what it's always been for as far back as people can remember.",
"Vaccines, antibiotics, and people not eating their own excrement. Those three things cause a huge improvement in life expectancy. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3ky4l3 | why are wedding dresses so expensive? | My mom is watching a dress show in the other room, and I think the cheapest dress I heard was around two thousand dollars. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ky4l3/eli5_why_are_wedding_dresses_so_expensive/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv1h4zd",
"cv1h5ku",
"cv1hcc7"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"[Basically](_URL_0_), expensive materials, and lots of labor (relative to most clothing items) but also a high willingness to pay (meaning people are far more willing to pay a lot for a wedding than basically any other party in their lives) and some luxury good behavior (an expensive watch or Vera Wang wedding dress is valuable because it's expensive suggesting the wearer had enough money to spend a considerable sum on the dress). \n\nThat they're usually sold by wedding dress boutiques, adds to the markup (going mass market like David's Bridal tends to offer reasonably priced options). ",
"People have \"this is once in life time\" mindset. Even though more and more people are have multiple weddings in their lives. Same logic diamond jewellers sell transparent piece of carbon for hell lot of money. ",
"A number of reasons:\n\n\n* Luxury / status item - they are a once in a lifetime purchase so people are more likely to be willing to spend more on them than they would otherwise.\n\n\n* Expensive materials - they are often genuinely made of more expensive materials than normal dresses\n\n\n* Lots of material - as well as being often made of higher quality/more expensive materials they generally make use of lots of materials. Not just the train itself but generally they have a lot of layers, a lot of details and flourishes etc. all that add to the cost.\n\n\n* Tailor made/complex machining - it is quite a lot more work to make a wedding dress than a standard dress, adding significantly to the labour cost of production.\n\n\n* Fashion - currently trendy/fashionable dresses will attract a higher premium than out of favour designs \n\n\nDon't be fooled by people that suggest it is purely a rip-off to be charging such high amounts for dresses. Certainly there's a potentially very large premium added to the real cost of production but it's also fair to say that as dresses they are genuinely more expensive to manufacture.\n\n\nAll that said...good value wedding dresses exist, my wife's cost < £100.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/08/05/138760908/why-are-wedding-dresses-so-expensive"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
220j2x | the sickle cell and why it is in black people and why it makes them pass out, and what does it do? what is the sickle cell? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/220j2x/eli5_the_sickle_cell_and_why_it_is_in_black/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgi604m"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"As said before, sickle cell is caused by a mutation for gene for hemoglobin in red blood cells. People with sickle cell anemia have 2 mutated alleles while those with \"sickle cell trait\" have only one mutated allele and one normal allele. \n\nThe abnormal hemoglobin is \"sticky\" in low oxygen environments and causes red blood cells to become deformed and sickled in shape and rigid. This is a problem because these cells cannot pass though blood vessels as easily as normal RBCs can. I think \n(not sure on this one) that they can even get stuck and clog up vessels causing blindness and pain.\n\nThe reason why so many black people have sickle cell, is that having the trait (so only one copy of the mutated allele) makes people more resistant to malaria. Malaria is a huge problem is sub-saharan Africa. While the exact mechanism is still unknown, we believe that this resistance is caused by RBC's sickleing when infected by the malaia parasite. This makes people with sickle cell trait better able to survive than people without the trait in malaria prone regions. \n\nSo even though having sickle cell anemia makes people sick, having the sickle cell trait can be beneficial."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1luw9p | why isn't there a national conversation about the mass genocide of the native americans? it seems to just be a glazed over part of our history. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1luw9p/eli5_why_isnt_there_a_national_conversation_about/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc2zea9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because genocide is mass intentional murder. What happened to the majority of the native americans occurred between the time of the first explorers and the pilgrims. The first explorers brought diseases with them that the native americans had no immunity to. This spread through the entire american continents killing between 70-90% of the indigenous population. (scholars disagree only on 70-90% range, not that it happened, but they all agree at least 70%.) It was a brutal one-two punch of smallpox (known) and suspected hantavirus. Since Europeans wouldn't know about germ theory for another 100s years, they had no idea that simply arriving and interacting with them would kill off so many. So by the time the pilgrims had to flee death and torture in England and took refuge in the new world's wilderness, there was almost 'nobody home'.\n\nEven then things started out ok between european refugees and native americans. But you figure, they watched their people's almost die out to disease, then these whites start taking more and more land, and more and more of them arriving all the time, you're going to be upset at them too and there's going to be conflict. The europeans literally had no place else to go- they could stay in europe and be burned at the stake, or take their chances far away in the wilderness. Up and down the frontier, native americans would clash with new settlers spreading farther west...natives saw it as defending themselves, so did the settlers. Natives couldn't tell who was a passifist non-fighting puritan or quaker or anabaptist- they'd just hit a new farm that had taken more of their land, and kill the family in desperation. Then other settlers would round up volunteers and go kill indians in reprisal. In this way, pushing the frontier farther and farther as more and more people arrived.\nIt was only much later that european governments started getting greedy for the land, and that differing nationalities involved native americans in wars against other nationalities, using them to do their fighting with each other. It wouldn't be for about 200 years that the frontier had pushed west, and then clashes got so bad that the new 'American' government started pushing natives onto reservations, both to contain the problem and save lives on both sides. But by then, only in the west did many natives remain anyway. Of course, by the 1800s people finally figured out germs, and a couple American military talked about giving smallpox-laden blankets to native americans to solve the ongoing fighting...we know who discussed it from letters, and it's certainly likely it happened, but its unknown for sure whether they ever did.\n\nIt would be a clash of cultures native americans just weren't going to win, and when two peoples fight and kill each other, sheer numbers and more technology is going to win out. Thankfully, we've all gotten more civilized a few hundred years later. And certainly its not glazed over as part of history. Unless, like you, people operate under a mistaken impression that europeans arrived and just started killing natives for fun, and they think that's how most of them died. New diseases to which they had no immunity wiped most of them out, and then on-going small clashes with settlers for the next 200 years continued to whittle away at their populations. Then the west opened, and the conflict escalated with the government involved until there were so few left, and the end result; government lands set aside to relocate the small remaining populations to, in order to try to finally stop the endless killings on both sides.\n\n-----\n**TL;DR** No genocide: new diseases killed the majority off, and then ongoing small clashes that went on for a few hundred years as more and more people arrived kept whittling away at the populations. Then after about 200 years of culture clash resulting in deaths on both sides (but of course, mostly natives, due to lesser advancement/technology), the government relocations to try to finally solve the problem. Therefore, no national conversation about genocide because there never was one.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1bqcr3 | how does ballistic missile defense system work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bqcr3/eli5how_does_ballistic_missile_defense_system_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9912ro",
"c994njt",
"c997r73"
],
"score": [
21,
3,
17
],
"text": [
"Yo dawg, we heard you like missiles, so we're shooting missiles at your missiles so you can... Yeah nevermind that.\n\nBut basically that's what's done, at least with an antiballistic missile system. Smaller faster missiles are shot at the incoming ( Ballistic ) missiles and blowing them up. This is how the Patriot missile system works.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n\nSome ships have a diffrent missile defense, which is a radar-controlled gatling gun. The same basic concept, see where a missile is going, shoot it full of holes.\n\n_URL_1_\n\nThere's also a(n experimental) laster weapon which is mounted on a boeing aircraft. Again radar tracks the missiles and then a laser burns it to a crisp.",
"What I want to know is, if a nuclear missile is intercepted and shot down, what happens? Is there a nuclear explosion at the place of interception? How large/dangerous is the explosion compared to if it had hit its target? Will the area still be radioactive? How screwed is everyone near the interception? Do Ballistic Missile Defense Systems intentionally try to shoot down missiles when they are in low populated areas, or do they just shoot them down as fast as possible?",
"Nice try North Korea."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_missile",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
2hij7i | when i eat a bunch of sour fruits, for example sour apples or a lemon, why are my cheeks and forehead sweating so much? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hij7i/eli5_when_i_eat_a_bunch_of_sour_fruits_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"cksz7r5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I never experienced this myself but was intrigued as to why, so I did some research and found this answer.\n\n > In general, sweating is caused by too much heat, even if you're not aware of the heat. This can happen if the bowel moves and so raises the core temperature. Such movement is often accompanied with sweating, and since you only feel the normal temperature on the skin, it is cold sweat. But at the same time your core is hot so you think it's cold, but it will later mix to normal.\n\n > Anyway, it points to unusual bowel movement. This can be due to food allergy or, in a milder form, in food intolerances which are quite common. When it comes to sour ingredients, they are often in fruits, so I'll make a shot in the blue and say that you have a food intolerance against some fruits. You can check this hypothesis by trying chemically pure acetic acid to sour your food. If that doesn't result in sweat/hotness then it's probably the fruits.\n\nSince it's found on the Interwebs I can't tell you for sure this is the answer but sounds likely.\n\n**EDIT** Forgot to add the link _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/5156/does-sour-food-cause-sweating"
]
] |
||
2oqc0t | why does youtube say a video has 301+ views during the first few hours of a new video posted? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2oqc0t/eli5why_does_youtube_say_a_video_has_301_views/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmpix26",
"cmpix8a",
"cmpixs2"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"At 300 YouTube holds the count to make sure it's getting legit views. Sometimes two or more counts get in at the same time so often it's caught on 301",
"This has been covered [here](_URL_0_)\n\nBasically it's the cut off point of where they take the video views serious. There are million of videos on YouTube that have only a handful of views. Home videos, bad blog attempts, it's not worth the effort to make sure their view count is accurate. When a video has more than 300 views they take it a little more serious making sure the views are real.",
"It stops the visible counter until it works out how many of the views are real and to make sure it isn't being rigged. Numberphile did a good video on this which explains it in a bit more depth _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://youtu.be/oIkhgagvrjI"
],
[
"http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oIkhgagvrjI"
]
] |
||
lxmb9 | eil5: greek economic crisis and its ramifications for germany and the eurozone | I read a lot of economic blogs but when it comes to the EU economic situation, I feel like I'm trying to understand the causes of WWI -- I'm looking for a simple narrative but there isn't one (except the "Greeks are lazy takers of EU money," which I learned is demonstrably untrue based on average working hours.) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lxmb9/eil5_greek_economic_crisis_and_its_ramifications/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2wgt61",
"c2wgt61"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Greece has a history of poor financial management, which meant they tended to inflate away their debt, which meant that they had to borrow at relatively high rates. When they joined the EU and Euro they agreed to manage their finances better, and being on the Euro meant they couldn't inflate, so their rates dropped. They took advantage of this and borrowed a lot of money, but didn't reform their finances and just cooked their books. That worked for a while, but now they're saying they can't pay and need to be bailed out or go bankrupt.",
"Greece has a history of poor financial management, which meant they tended to inflate away their debt, which meant that they had to borrow at relatively high rates. When they joined the EU and Euro they agreed to manage their finances better, and being on the Euro meant they couldn't inflate, so their rates dropped. They took advantage of this and borrowed a lot of money, but didn't reform their finances and just cooked their books. That worked for a while, but now they're saying they can't pay and need to be bailed out or go bankrupt."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
9zg740 | why do your legs turn red when taking a shower? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9zg740/eli5_why_do_your_legs_turn_red_when_taking_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"ea8whut"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The hot water heats up the capillaries under your skin which makes them fill with more blood - Warmth causes blood vessels to dilate, which causes more blood to near the surface of the skin. When the body is warm, more blood is able to near the surface of the skin making the skin feel warm and look red."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1pn6zn | what happens to a recovered opiate addict if they require opiates for anesthesia or pain management? | What happens to someone who has recovered from an opiate dependency and then needs surgery or pain management? Will it force a relapse? are there any alternatives?
Thanks | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pn6zn/eli5_what_happens_to_a_recovered_opiate_addict_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd40d04"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"This depends on the hospital, I think, and their procedures.\n\nIf someone has a known opiate addiction or dependency, pain management specialists would be consulted to carefully manage the case. The usual method would be to avoid using potentially addictive drugs, especially drugs that the patient has already used. They might keep the patient in the hospital longer for observation and help with tapering down the carefully-controlled dose of medication.\n\nAlternatively, the physician can inject local anesthetic near the parts of the spinal cord that receive pain signals and block the pain while mostly avoiding involving the opioid receptors in the brain.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5atq17 | what exactly is human trafficking? | I've been browsing social media and reading stuff and this is something the comes up from time to time. What is it exactly? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5atq17/eli5_what_exactly_is_human_trafficking/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9j802c",
"d9j8105",
"d9j87b3",
"d9j8aeo",
"d9j8dsq",
"d9jq0nv",
"d9jyh8c"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2,
7,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Human trafficking is the illegal trade in people for the purposes of commercial sexual exploitation and other forms of forced labor.",
"People being sold to other people like they are property. Usually but not always females for purposes of marriage or sex. ",
"I live in a country which I could go and buy a bride. And I don't mean mail order bride after courting her online. I mean go find a guy who has women for sale for the purpose of being wives. That is one form of human trafficking.\n\nTechnically it would include all kinds of kidnapping, and even transferring prisoners, I imagine. But normally people mean the industry of selling other people, usually not in the original location.",
"It's basically slavery. It's people being transported and sold like goods, and robbed of their most basic freedoms. ",
"There are two classical definitions of human trafficking:\n\nThe first is when someone is taken against their will and moved to a different area for the purpose of selling them into slavery (sexual or otherwise).\n\nThe second is when someone is voluntarily smuggled into another country as an illegal immigrant or refuge.\n\nMore modernly there has been a push to include a third definition of human trafficking which is whenever a prostitute is moved from one geographical region to another by their pimp - even if that move is voluntary. According to the FBI, about 2/3 of the human trafficking in the US falls under this category, while about 1/3 falls under the more traditional two categories.",
"In the US human trafficking is when you have your movements limited by someone, usually via threats, via giant debts or by force. It's often compared to modern day slavery but it's also a modern day indentured servitude which was banned under the 13th amendment. \n\nIf you pay someone cash to come to work here as a prostitute voluntarily that wouldn't be considered trafficking. \n\nIf the person that brought you over, and held your passport until you paid the airfare and other costs, that would be human trafficking. \n\nNot all trafficking is prostitution, restaurant or domestic work is also one form, if a person brings you over and then requires to pay down that debt then it can be also be considered trafficking. \n\nIt's one of the reasons why if someone says they are entering the US as a domestic often the US officials will deny entry because domestic helpers are one of the most trafficked in the US and elsewhere. \n\n",
"People are stolen and sold as if they are an item. A lot of theses are used as prostitutes/whore houses, to-be wives in other countries. Try watching the movie 'Taken' (Hollywood take on human trafficking)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
43dfmd | i visited a country recently where the exchange rate was like 1:45... and the average salary over there is like $10k... does that make them poor? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43dfmd/elif_i_visited_a_country_recently_where_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"czhf51p"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Kind of, but not necessarily. It means that if they took their salary, exchanged it for US dollars, and tried to spend them in the US, they'd be poor.\n\nBut presumably everything is cheaper in that country as well, so that a $10k salary might actually be enough to pay your bills and live comfortably.\n\nPrices vary a lot between countries. In some countries you can stay at a hotel for a couple of dollars a day. In others, you need to pay close to a hundred times that. So whether they're poor or not depends on how much they can afford to buy with their local salary, and their local prices."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
223t8i | will the us financial economy ever recover to the same degree of the mid-2000 collapse? interest rates on bank cd's etc. is it possible to surpass previous levels of financial security somehow? | I'm wondering if at our current "progress" there is any turning back to "good ol' days" or have we evolved past being able to go back at this stage? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/223t8i/eli5_will_the_us_financial_economy_ever_recover/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgj1yhy",
"cgj2qem",
"cgj50hi"
],
"score": [
4,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"We're already setting new highs in numerous areas. Interest rates are looking to rise as the Fed scales back their efforts to keep them low.\n\nThe US economy is in great shape and we are still not fully recovered. The next decade is likely to be a good one.",
"The economy is generally very cyclical, so...yes...we can expect the economy to boom and bust over and over again. As for your specific examples, using higher interest rates as a generalized barometer for \"the economy\" isn't a very good yard stick. It is reasonable to say that our very low interest rates currently are the result of conditions in the economy that aren't good, but...high interests are an equally large problem as they decrease investment. For example, increases in interest rates correlate to [slower growth in the stock market](_URL_0_).\n",
"_URL_0_\n\nNo the \"good ol' days\" will never be coming back anytime soon, wages are falling and more importantly the US population is aging, an issue that almost every country in the world is facing ATM. Meanwhile the country is moving towards the direction where things will get worse, not better, with the rich pulling the country down with them. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.investopedia.com/articles/06/interestaffectsmarket.asp"
],
[
"http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2013/08/why-the-us-economy-wont-fully-recover/"
]
] |
|
3vqhks | what's the difference between a screw gun and an impact driver? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vqhks/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_a_screw_gun_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxpsude",
"cxpxi9q"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If you're talking about a regular drill and an impact wrench, the difference is that a traditional drill rotates at a constant speed. Whereas, impact wrenches literally use small, repeated impacts and higher torque to do the same job. Impact wrenches are generally used for applications where bolts need to be torqued down really hard and a traditional wrench or drill won't do the job. ",
"An impact driver has nothing to do with a drill. It's a big thick manual screwdriver that you strike the end of with a hammer and the jolt simultaneously shocks and turns the screw that you are trying to remove from a metal structure. Used for loosening jammed screws."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6vvokn | how do flea collars work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6vvokn/eli5_how_do_flea_collars_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm3ehpk",
"dm3eqqe",
"dm3fcgo"
],
"score": [
17,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Flees travel from the body to the eyes and mouth to get water, so if you put band of something that kills fleas along the route they die. ",
"Flea collars are actually fairly ineffective. You're essentially putting a ring of pesticide around your pets neck that only really keeps fleas off of the neck and back of the head. \nFlea collars primarily contain two particular chemicals, tetrachlorvinphos and propoxur, both of which can actually cause chemical burns on your pets skin. Tetrachlorvinphos actually belongs to a class of chemicals called organophosphates known to cause nerve damage. \n\nThe way flea collars work is either to emit a toxin that kills or repels fleas, or to release a substance that dissolves and spreads throughout the fatty layers of the animal’s skin so fleas are killed on the animal’s body. ",
"Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n\n1. [ELI5: How do flea collars work? ](_URL_1_)\n1. [ELI5: How do flea collars work? ](_URL_0_)\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1l30bw/eli5_how_do_flea_collars_work/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2k5tf7/eli5_how_do_flea_collars_work/"
]
] |
||
buk5c2 | how come mammals’ fur doesn’t come in a wider array of colors like green, blue, pink or purple? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/buk5c2/eli5_how_come_mammals_fur_doesnt_come_in_a_wider/ | {
"a_id": [
"epdcbr9",
"epde3vl",
"epdfo9u",
"epdhk01",
"epdhsfc",
"epdhv3a",
"epdksfg",
"epdmmsl"
],
"score": [
764,
42,
8,
2,
733,
2,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"The only reason reptiles like snakes are brightly colored is to alert predators that they are poisonous. Birds are brightly colored to attract mates. Fish are brightly colored to attract mates and alert predators they are poisonous. Amphibians like frogs are brightly colored to alert predators they are poisonous.\n\nMammals need to be camouflaged to better hunt and survive because food isn’t as easily found and predators are numerous.\n\nEdit: am stupid and confused frogs for reptiles.",
"Most mammals have adapted to become camouflaged, as they are either hunters, or hunted. Therefore more neutral colors to blend in with soil and brush are necessary. Most insects and reptiles have also adapted camouflage, but many of them have also adapted bright colors for attracting mates.\n\nBirds on the other hand rely much less on camouflage. Some have become very colorful which attracts mates. Some reptiles and insects have developed bright colors which help identify them as dangerous to other creatures, making them less tempting targets for larger predators.",
"Camouflage, they would stick out like a sore thumb if they were brightly coloured. They would either be on the receiving end of a predator, or they would starve because their prey would spot them a mile off.\n\nEdit: Update. After further reading, many animals see colours as various shades of the same colour, which again varies by animals. The information I read, \n\n\"The study simulating what colours preys of the tiger see when looking at the predator found that animals like deers are essentially red-green colour blind like some humans.\n\nThis means they only pick up greens and blues and not oranges and reds. \n\nThis means they are more sensitive to the blue-green portion of the spectrum (due to their eyes' high rod density) and less sensitive to light of long wavelengths (orange and red). \n\nTherefore the tiger appears green to deers rather than orange, which helps their camouflaging effect.\n\nOther animals that are red-green 'colourblind' include: wolves, coyotes, foxes, bulls, dogs and cats.\"",
"[_URL_0_](_URL_0_)\n\n & #x200B;\n\nSciShow episode on this very topic. Explains it well.",
"Scishow did an episode on this: _URL_0_\n\nThe gist is that mammals went through an evolutionary bottleneck where all mammals were nocturnal. Nocturnal animals have no need for color vision and little need for bright or dramatic coloration. Fast forward to when mammals aren't all nocturnal and most of them still can't see more than two colors (dichromat), so colorful mating displays wouldn't be useful. A few species such as primates redeveloped being able to see three colors (trichromat), which is why you have humans wondering why mammals don't have more colorful fur.\n\nIn contrast to most mammals being dichromats with the odd trichromat species, many birds and reptiles are tetrachromats (four colors). So we most likely are unable to fully appreciate the bright coloration of those animals.\n\nEdit: note that dichromat, etc. refer to the number of color receptors. So humans as trichromats see three primary colors that combine to make the other colors we see.",
"Some animals are really bright, interesting colours as part of 'sexual selection.' These pigments are biologically expensive to make - a mallard duck's beautiful, iridescent green head is composed of hundreds of layers of shimmering, differently coloured pigments. Having such a colour shows that 1) You're fit and well nourished, enough to make the colour in the first place and 2) you're strong and fast enough to survive, even when you are brightly coloured and obvious to enemies. \n\nIt would take a random mutation in your DNA for an interesting colour to show up in the first place. This can happen naturally over time, or maybe if you were exposed to some chemicals or radiation. \n\nIt's then a case of whether the new variation is so striking and beautiful it manages to secure many mates before the animal dies of...anything...or if the new variation makes the animal so obvious to predators, it's eaten before it can have babies and pass on the exciting new mutation. \n\nMost mammals have fur which helps them blend in with their environment. To be a different colour, like bright blue or pink, eliminates one of your major defences against predation. \n\nOver thousands of years of evolution, generally, the ability to camouflage yourself has been more important for surviving, and passing on genes to your offspring, than being exciting colours. So, we see lots of offspring with boring colours in today's populations. There may have been wildly coloured ones born at some point in the past, but they haven't lived long enough to pass their genes on and become an established variation of a species.",
"What do you mean...? _URL_0_",
"Biologist here:\n\nThere are generally several ways to answer a question like this.\n\nFirst of all, lets examine what pigments (colors substances) are and what mammals do have. \n\nThe main pigment in mammals is [melanin](_URL_1_) and its relatives. These produce a variety of shades of blacks, browns, yellows, and reds, and make up the vast majority of mammal coloration, in combination with whites (which come from scattering and reflecting light, and are generally the color of fur without any pigment). \n\nMelanin is _very_ widespread in the animal world. Other animals use it for pigments too. But unlike mammals, a wide variety of other colors are present. Many of the brighter reds and yellows in other species come from carotenoids...These pigments are made only by plants and algae and animals incorporate them in their diet. For example flamingos are pink because they eat little shrimp that eat algae that have carotenoids. There are almost no mammals that display carotenoids. Blues and greens almost always come from [structural coloration](_URL_2_), which is not a pigmented chemical but is instead a nanoscopic array of ridges that interferes with visible light to produce colors. This is what gives so many birds, fish, and reptiles their blue or green coloration. It's almost unknown in mammals with a couple of exceptions: the blue on a [mandrill](_URL_0_) is the most visible one. \n\nSo the most basic explanation is: mammals have only melanin to work with, therefore they can't be the other colors.\n\nBut that's not entirely satisfying: I mean _why_ don't mammals have the other color pigments? Why don't they use carotenoids? Why don't they use structural colors?\n\nTo answer that, we have to think about why animals are brightly colored. If you look at the brightest and showiest animals, usually those colors directly function to attract a mate. But most mammals are red-green colorblind, and as a group mammals tend to use sound and especially smell to judge potential mates. As a result, coloration is less important and there's less reason to evolve a variety of showy colors. The exception here is the best evidence: there's one group of mammals that has good color vision and relies on sight to choose mates: the old world primates. And this is exactly the group that has some of the most colorful mammal species, with the brightest reds and blues.\n\nOk, so why do mammals avoid vision and rely more on smell and sound? Why are they colorblind at all? Well, early mammals seem to have been small, noctournal, burrowing critters. Think \"shrew\" and you won't be far off. These are not the kind of conditions that favor heavy use of vision. Later on mammals got their day in the sun, but by that point they'd lost some color vision and pigments. \n\nNow, you may have a couple counterpoints coming to mind at this point. For example, what about bright coloration to deter predators? That's definitely something many animals use their brilliant colors for...but you don't need blues or greens or pinks or purples for it. You just need high contrast, bold patterns to be visible. As skunks show, black and white do the job just fine. Mammals didn't have to re-evolve other colors to manage that. \n\nAnd what about camoflage? Wouldn't green be useful there? Perhaps, but maybe not as much as you would think. There aren't many habitats where green is present but browns or yellows are not. Most mammals don't _need_ green to be camoflaged, they can simply match other things in their environment. But more importantly, if they don't have the genes for green color they can't just pull them out of thin air to be green even if it would be useful. \n\nOne final thought: structural pigments are found in the skin, and also in structures like feathers and scales. It may also be the case that mammal hair is just badly suited on a nano-scale level to act as a structural color. It's interesting that the mammals which do have vivid structural colors, like mandrills, have them in their skin rather than fur."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyhULLXLUDw"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyhULLXLUDw"
],
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/QCqfkS7.jpg"
],
[
"https://animals.sandiegozoo.org/sites/default/files/inline-images/mandrill_male.jpg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanin",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_coloration"
]
] |
||
74c0gg | if nuclear fallout is such a huge concern. how are nations able to test nuclear weapons within their borders. | If it's because it's done in remote places. Does that mean areas far away from major cities likely to be attacked are safe?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/74c0gg/eli5_if_nuclear_fallout_is_such_a_huge_concern/ | {
"a_id": [
"dnx3yu4",
"dnx47a7",
"dnx4v29",
"dnx8c35",
"dnxh62e",
"dny44hy"
],
"score": [
17,
2,
18,
3,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Largely countries do their testing now underground, which limits the amount of fallout. Fallout is about radioactive particles getting into the atmosphere then falling back down. If you do your testing underground, there's not much fallout.\n\nThere's still radiation, but then you just keep people away from those locations (hence doing it in the middle of nowhere, like deserts)",
"If you bury a nuclear device test deep underground or under a mountain you can contain all the radiation. North Korea uses this method. You can also eliminate fallout on the ground by detonating the blast sufficiently high off the ground. ",
"Nuclear fallout is very minimal from standard nuclear weapons, hence how people live in Hiroshima and Nagasaki just fine today. \n\nNuclear tests will often be underground, underwater, or an airburst. The Japanese bombing was airbursts, which maximize destruction by create minimal fallout.\n\nRegardless, nuclear fallout is not a huge concern except in a full-scale nuclear war or reactor meltdowns. In that case, thousands of nuclear weapons would be dropped. It's not something that happens in any significant quantity from a single weapon. Chernobyl is an example of an instance that did cause consider nuclear fallout, and the reactor core is still humming away, buried in concrete underground. ",
"Since 1963, a treaty has been in place that bans testing of nuclear weapons in space, air, ground, water - everywhere EXCEPT underground.\n\nAnother treaty calling for a complete ban on testing was introduced in 1996, but has not been adopted yet by all parties.\n\n\n_URL_0_",
"They used to do it out in the open, before they realized the full extent of the negative repercussions of nuclear fallout. So they used to test the bombs in the middle of the desert where there weren't many people around in the US. And the largest number of US tests were in the South Pacific, around the Bikini Atoll, using bombs many times more powerful than those used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. At the time of the tests in the 1950s, the native inhabitants of the area were forced to leave by the US government, with the understanding that they'd be able to go back in a short while to their homes. However, they're STILL not back there because it's still radioactive. \n\nWhen it was realized how serious the damage caused by nuclear testing was, countries started doing their testing underground, so as not to pollute the atmosphere with more radiation.\n\nAs for safety nowadays if major cities are attacked: it would certainly be safer there than it would be closer to the cities. However, it's been theorized that a large nuclear war involving many powerful weapons will cause major damage to the earth that will wipe out a large amount of life on the planet. It is hypothesized that it will cause \"nuclear winter\"--a worldwide cooling brought on by all the smoke and debris that are thrown up into the atmosphere by the bombs and prolonged fires afterwards. This will result in crop failures and death. There will also be a lot of radiation in the atmosphere that will pollute the earth and can cause sickness and mutations. So a true global thermonuclear war might end up killing most of life on earth. ",
"So many very incorrect responses here. I was kind of afraid of opening this thread for this reason, but here goes...\n\nFallout is a concern when you detonate nuclear weapons on the surface. Even small nuclear weapons can produce considerable contamination downwind. The Trinity shot of 1945, for example, [created quite a large plume](_URL_5_). You wouldn't want to be someone who lived in that plume; close-in to the site, it could actually kill you or give you radiation sickness. Further out, it raises cancer rates.\n\n[The huge contaminating plumes from multi-megaton bombs](_URL_3_) did contaminate the test sites they were set off in, and people did have to be evacuated, and many people who lived near the test sites did contract cancers, have higher rates of birth defects, etc. \n\nIn the United States, people living due-east of the Nevada Test Site (e.g. in Utah) [did pick up significant levels of radiation from the drifting clouds](_URL_2_). Individually this adds up to a small dose; over a large population this means an increase in cancers. Various estimates have been made by the number of people, worldwide, who got cancers from US nuclear testing. As one source concludes:\n\n > \"As a result of fallout from U.S. atmospheric testing between 1945 and 1963, an estimated 70,000 to 800,000 people in the United States and around the world have died or will die prematurely from a fatal cancer attributable to the testing (a comparable number of fatalities would be attributable to the Soviet testing program).\"\n\nThis is from Arjun Makhijani and Stephen I. Schwartz, \"Victims of the Bomb,\" in Stephen I. Schwartz, ed., Atomic Audit, 395-431, on 395. \n\nThe US has paid out [over $1 billion USD](_URL_4_) to over 20,000 people who were \"downwind\" of the Nevada Test Site during the era of US atmospheric nuclear testing there (1948-1962), who themselves or their relatives came down with diseases attributable to fallout exposure. This probably _under_estimates the effects a bit but I just want to emphasize that the answer to your question is not \"they made it work perfectly safe and it wasn't a problem,\" the answer is, \"they exposed huge populations of people to radioactivity, and justified it by arguing that the safety of the nation was worth their collective sacrifice.\"\n\nAfter 1962 the US, USSR, and UK did all of their testing underground. China and France continued to test in the atmosphere for some time afterwards. Today nobody but North Korea has tested since the late 1990s, and so far they've been testing underground (but there are worries they may test in the atmosphere).\n\nAs for a nuclear war scenario, it depends on what you assume \"the enemy\" will do. Nuclear attacks on cities are often presumed to be more or less fallout-free because the goal will be \"medium\" destruction and not \"heavy\" destruction and that tends to involve setting the bombs off high-enough that fallout doesn't occur. However if you imagine \"the enemy\" will attack US missile silos in the midwest, which are buried deep underground and are \"hards\" targets,\" then you are imagining a lot of surface burst weapons and that creates a lot of fallout. So fallout maps will vary by the assumptions you make (including about weather behavior). Here is an estimate [for the mid-1980s by Oak Ridge National Laboratory](_URL_0_) — you can see that being downwind of cities, and of military bases, is a dangerous proposition. By comparison [here is one from the 1960s](_URL_1_), which has more realistic weather patterns.\n\n\"Safe\" is always relative here. If you know how to take shelter from fallout and have shelter facilities available to you, in many cases you can be reasonably safe from it. The destruction of cities and infrastructure will have other impacts, of course, that will make life post-attack \"less safe\" (e.g., disrupting your food and energy supply)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_Nuclear_Test_Ban_Treaty"
],
[],
[
"http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/1986-OakRidgeFallout-ORNL-6252.jpg",
"http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Fallout_Map_3-23-1963-Saturday-Evening-Post.jpg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada_Test_Site#/media/File:US_fallout_exposure.png",
"http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Castle-Bravo-fallout.jpg",
"https://www.justice.gov/civil/awards-date-10052017",
"http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Trinity-fallout.jpg"
]
] |
|
4ez71a | why are our veins sometimes flush with the skin, while other times they are raised? | Especially around the forearm/back of hand, why do our veins switch like this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ez71a/eli5_why_are_our_veins_sometimes_flush_with_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"d24lv2r"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When your body is warm and trying to cool down, it can do so by expanding your vessels near the surface of the skin, promoting release of heat to the environment. If you are extremely cold, the vessels near your skin constrict to help conserve heat and prevent its release to the environment. These processes are controlled by local mediators and the sympathetic nervous system."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3td055 | if humans are 80% water, why are we classified as carbon-based? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3td055/eli5_if_humans_are_80_water_why_are_we_classified/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx53xrf",
"cx544su",
"cx54ozr",
"cx5enqs"
],
"score": [
15,
61,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"The important chemical and structural components are based on carbon-centric molecules.\n\nThe water is just cell filler. It adds volume and acts as a solvent for liquid chemistry but usually doesn't participate.\n\n",
"My house is mostly air but I still say that it's a brick house.\n\nThe water is just filler. It's there so that chemicals can float about and react more easily, water is vital to life but it's doesn't define us like carbon does.",
"Carbon forms the basis of most of the complex chemistry that makes us alive. The water is what's known as a 'suspension medium', that is to say, it's just an inert substance that dissolves the carbon chemicals so that they can freely mix and react with each other.\n\nIt's a bit like saying that a car is a 'gasoline-based vehicle' even though most of it is metal and not gasoline.",
"I just came here to say a mosh pit is only 20% away from being a swimming pool.....think about it lol"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1xd5m1 | how can redbull and monstersponsor so much sport things, it feels like everybody is sponsored by them | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xd5m1/eli5_how_can_redbull_and_monstersponsor_so_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfa99ye"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"They have a lot of money and want to have advertisements around their biggest demographic."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3d0091 | if colds are passed on by an infected creature, how did the first creature get it? | If you get a cold from a contagious creature, how did the first creature start the spread? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3d0091/eli5_if_colds_are_passed_on_by_an_infected/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct0jjhn",
"ct0lppb",
"ct0mszl"
],
"score": [
12,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"We're not really sure how viruses started. A virus is basically a chunk of DNA (or RNA) on it's own that can break into living cells and take over those cells to make it produce more viruses. Nobody's sure if viruses evolved as an offshoot of cellular life or if they're just a random corruption of broken-down cells.",
"Thats a chicken/egg problem. The answer, as always is: \"its not that simple\", and evolution plays a significant role in it. Eg. we still don't really understand how viruses came to be (i.e. if they developed out of organisms that had their own metabolism or in some other way). See also [viral evolution](_URL_0_) for a more in-depth analysis.",
"There have always been parasitic creatures, one of them evolved to be less fatal with a quick mutation rate and that is what the common cold is. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_evolution"
],
[]
] |
|
8s2wmm | why do suntans start to fade? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8s2wmm/eli5_why_do_suntans_start_to_fade/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0w4hdm",
"e0wda37"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Because you’re constantly shedding the damaged tanned skin cells with new non tan skin cells",
"If you rub your arm you get little black \"eraser dirt\", that is dead skin.\n\nThis shedding of dead skin happens naturally as well not just from direct abrasion.\n\nWhen you shed skin it is replaced by duplicating skin cells from underneath the top layer, these cells can be made with more and more melanin (the pigment that causes darker hair and skin) and that is what causes the tan.\n\nSo as these tan melanin cells come to the top, they fall off and the color goes to, leading to the loss of the tan.\n\nExtra: The dead skin you shed naturally is what makes up the dust you wipe off your T.V. and stuff when you clean the house."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
13tzuo | what exactly happens when i text/call someone with my cell phone? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13tzuo/eli5_what_exactly_happens_when_i_textcall_someone/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7762n2"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"When you make a **call**, your mobile transmits a signal to the nearest cell tower. The tower receives the signal and sends it to a switch board via cables. The switchboard either sends the signal to another board through land lines, or line-of-sight microwave transmitters mounted on the tower. The signal then goes to a switchboard nearest the receiver's phone and the then to a tower to be transmitted (if mobile) or the landline phone. If you are moving, your phone is handed off from cell to cell as needed. For a **Text** the process is essentially the same only the signals are different and it's a burst of information rather than a stream. Your phone is in constant contact with cell towers while it's on and a text is just piggy-backed on the original connector signal while a phone call is its own special frequency. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
14lzkc | [el5] oil prices versus gas prices | This is how I understand it so far... There are 42 gallons in a barrel of oil. If a barrel s $100, divide that by 42 and add like 12¢ for refining.
But this never equals what I pay at the pump. Please help me understand this. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/14lzkc/el5_oil_prices_versus_gas_prices/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7ea7g4",
"c7eacy2",
"c7ebevq"
],
"score": [
4,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Location from refineries matters as well. The number of refineries in the U.S. has gone down over the last few decades, resulting in more varied costs due to transportation.",
"Add transportation. Add taxes. Add enough profit to pay rent on a gas station. Add wages. Add theft. Subtract a bit if it attracts people to a sufficiently profitable convenience store.\n\nNet result: you'll pay more in higher tax states, in states farther from refineries, in areas with high rent, and in areas with high crime.",
"Also gas prices are usually based on speculation as well. Right now people are speculating the demand on a supply we really dont know. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3hos3s | if you are driving a car 60 mph off a cliff, will the hit the ground at the same time as someone who drives 20 mph off of the cliff at the exact same time? | Would the force of gravity cause both cars to reach the ground at the same time? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hos3s/eli5_if_you_are_driving_a_car_60_mph_off_a_cliff/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu987hm",
"cu98ffw",
"cu98fgx"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Unless air resistance becomes a factor, yes. The car's horizontal and vertical movement can be calculated separately. The faster car will travel further overall, but they'll both get the same amount of time in the air.\n\nIf you want, you could test this by rolling rubber balls off the edge of a table at various speeds.",
"These are all great replies that have helped me grab a better concept of the outcome. Thank you!",
"Physics degree here\n\nThe only thing that matters in time of flight is vertical acceleration and initial vertical velocity. Since we assume that they are driving off a cliff, the initial vertical velocity (the moment the car is airborne) is zero. So it would theoretically be the same time of flight as some object just dropping off the side of the cliff as the cars leave the cliff. There is no acceleration in the horizontal direction, so there is no change, so it does not matter what happens in the x-y plane. Just the z axis."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1lyg3x | why can the us government drone strike countries and people say nothing about it but striking syria is such a big deal? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lyg3x/eli5why_can_the_us_government_drone_strike/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc3zpoq"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"We have permission to use drones both in Pakistan and Yemen (where the majority of drone strikes have occurred) as we help them root out some of the radical elements inside their country. I believe our mission in Pakistan is winding down, so there won't be as many in Pakistan. Furthermore, drone strikes aren't technically outlawed yet (if they ever do, Israel is going to be screwed), so using them isn't considered illegal like using chemical weapons.\n\n\nBTW, there has been a lot of debate regarding the use of drones, so it's not like people don't talk about them. They do, but since there is nothing illegal about them as of this date, then there really isn't anything we can say until they are outlawed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2kqrom | what would be a military/warfare analogy to our immune system and its response to pathogens/antigens? | Edit: It would be better if there are comparisons of different cells. For example - T helper cells cells as commanders or signallers | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2kqrom/eli5_what_would_be_a_militarywarfare_analogy_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"clnuctu",
"clnxnzx"
],
"score": [
24,
4
],
"text": [
"[George Carlin](_URL_0_) said it best, I think...\n\n > Besides, what do you think you have an immune system for? It’s for killing germs. But it needs practice. It needs germs to practice on. So if you kill all the germs around you and live a completely sterile life, then when germs do come along, you’re not going to be prepared. And never mind ordinary germs, what are you gonna do when some super-virus comes along that turns your vital organs into liquid shit? I’ll tell you what you’re gonna do. You’re gonna get sick, you’re gonna die, and you’re gonna deserve it, because you’re fuckin’ weak, and you’ve got a fuckin’ weak immune system. Let me tell you a true story about immunization. When I was a little boy in New York City in the 1940s, we swam in the Hudson River. And it was filled with raw sewage. Okay? We swam in raw sewage! You know, to cool off.\n\n > At that time the big fear was polio; thousands of kids died from polio every year. But you know somethin’? In my neighborhood no one ever got polio. No one. Ever! You know why? Because we swam in raw sewage! It strengthened our immune systems. The polio never had a prayer; we were tempered in raw shit! So, personally, I never take any special precautions against germs. I don’t shy away from people who sneeze and cough, I don’t wipe off the telephone, I don’t cover the toilet seat, and if I drop food on the floor, I pick it up and eat it. Even if I’m at a sidewalk café. In Calcutta. The poor section. On New Year’s morning during a soccer riot. And you know something? In spite of all of that so-called risky behavior, I never get infections. I just don’t get ’em, folks. I don’t get colds, I don’t get flu, and I don’t get food poisoning. And you know why? Because I have a good, strong immune system, and it gets a lot of practice.\n\n > My immune system is equipped with the biological equivalent of fully automatic, military assault rifles with night vision and laser scopes. And we have recently acquired phosphorous grenades, cluster bombs, and anti-personnel fragmentation mines. So, when my white blood cells are on patrol, reconnoitering my blood stream, seeking out strangers and other undesirables, if they see any—any—suspicious-looking germs of any kind, they don’t fuck around. They whip out the weapons, wax the motherfucker, and deposit the unlucky fellow directly into my colon! Directly into my colon! There’s no nonsense. There’s no Miranda warning, there’s none of that three-strikes-and-you’re-out shit. First offense, BAM! Into the colon you go. And speaking of my colon, I want you to know I don’t automatically wash my hands every time I go to the bathroom. Can you deal with that? Sometimes I do, sometimes I don’t. You know when I wash my hands? When I shit on them! That’s the only time. And you know how often that happens? Tops—tops—two, three times a week. Tops! Maybe a little more frequently over the holidays. You know what I mean?",
"Antibodies can behave one of two ways. They either stick to the pathogen (like a bacteria) and provide attachment points for other cells to destroy them, or they directly bind to the pathogens and 'handcuff' them together (which is how antibodies attack viruses, preventing them from attacking other cells and making it easy for the body to eliminate them); the military analog would be laser designating large vehicles, or capturing saboteurs/spies. Alternatively, calling in an airstrike in a hideout, or disabling vehicle mobility. \n\nAntibodies are produced by certain cells, called 'B cells'. When your body first encounters a pathogen, it first has to observe the pathogen's attributes (antigens) and figure which B cells are best equipped to fight it.\n\nEach basic B cell (like a technical officer) carries a different kind of antibody, which is sort of like individual skills/expertise; maybe this one attaches to a square antigen, while this other one attaches to a circular one. \n\nBut only one will actually turn the tide of the battle and fight the pathogen effectively, so your body has to try each type against it until it finds one that fits. In the meantime, if the pathogen is especially deadly, it may kill the host before it finds the right B cell. A strong immune system cycles through the process rapidly and efficiently. \n\nOnce it figures out which antibody is effective, it selects that cell to replicate and produce antibodies en masse, greatly increasing the effectiveness of the immune system and wiping out the pathogen.\n\nIn the event that the pathogen shows up again, the B cell type that defeated the pathogen is 'promoted' to memory B cell and stays in the body for a prolonged period of time; as a veteran of the previous infection, it can immediately recognize the pathogen and pump out antibodies much faster than B cells fresh out of 'basic training', which allows your body to defeat the infection before symptoms even appear.\n\nVaccinations work by letting your body 'train' against pathogens without taking damage from a real infection, by exposing it to only the antigen or a greatly weakened pathogen. From the vaccination, your body 'promotes' B cells that will be effective in a real infection.\n\nMemory B cells don't last forever, which is why you sometimes need booster shots, to train a new generation of B cells.\n\nHelper T cells are like field officers; they do not train B cells, but they can direct them to sub-specialize in various roles by switching out their antibody class (in places where competent B cells are present but using the wrong equipment, the Helper T cell equips them properly), maximize the effectiveness of the body's 'tanks' (macrophages), and direct/increase the activity of Killer T-cells when applicable. In particular, the Helper T cells are important when fighting unusual enemies (fungi, parasites, etc), because other cells are not experienced in recognizing strategic weaknesses and exploiting them with deft use of equipment. \n\nMacrophages are the army units of the body. They are employed in a wide variety of roles, ranging from general low-level defense and maintenance of infrastructure to large scale interventions against invading units (phagocytosis). They are the first ones on the ground when an invading force is spotted, and the first cells to capture enemy units and present their unique markers to Helper T Cells to relay information to the rest of the force. They are major components in dealing with exotic enemies like fungi or parasites. \n\nNatural-Killer (NK) and Killer T-cells are the counter-intelligence officers of the immune system. They are tasked with finding and eliminating viral-infected cells (infiltrating saboteurs, double agents turned by spies, citizens harboring the enemy) and cancer cells (rogue citizens or domestic terrorists). \n\nThey scan for certain attributes that would mark normal cells and also inspect for abnormal activity; in some cases of cancer and viral infection, the cell itself can call for NK/Killer T response despite being compromised. When they determine that a cell contains these threats, they terminate it with extreme prejudice, akin to cutting a gas line and igniting it in a huge explosion. \n\nThese cells are always present in the body even when an infection is not active, in order to prevent cancer (uprising of rogue factions).\n\nBasophils and mast cells are the police/civil defense, responsible for low-level defense. Sometimes they get overzealous and invoke an unnecessarily large response; these overkill responses have been known to cause collateral damage, possibly setting off chain reactions of events that could be deadly to the entire population. However, as cells that persist in exposed and breached areas, they are also integral in reporting the level of appropriate response and can recognize potential problems (particularly exotic ones like tick bites) that other cells do not. \n\nEosinophils are asymmetrical specialists that are given an unusual mix of highly destructive techniques (like those used in NK/Killer T cells) and special heavy weapons (like a specialized macrophage). They are the body's special forces, equipped to do things ranging from assassinating infiltrators (viruses, using enzymes that selectively destroy RNA) to taking down very large, alien structures (multicellular parasites). "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X29lF43mUlo"
],
[]
] |
|
adqp9e | are machines at bettings shops truly rigged, or are they the same as any other casino game? | So we all know how Casinos, make their money, have have a house edge, a slightly hire chance that the house will win.
But a virtual roulette machine at a betting shop, are those rigged to never land on your bet depending on how much you bet? Or are they designed just like IRL roulette tables, where yes you can win, you're just less likely? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/adqp9e/eli5_are_machines_at_bettings_shops_truly_rigged/ | {
"a_id": [
"edjgax0",
"edjgfkf",
"edjl5q7"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It's in their favor, they will make more money than it pays out. So even if someone wins 1000 bucks, they just made like 10,000 bucks.",
"Where are you at in the world?\n\nI guess I don’t know what “betting shop” means\n\nIn Nevada, I always crushed gas station and grocery store video BJ games at a much higher rate than casinos\n\nStupid example, but one that proved to be profitable over years\n\nProbably bc I played 5 hands and turned a $20 into $100 over and over at the grocery store\n\nIn and out mission \n\nAnd wasn’t drinking whiskey and “gambling” at a casino for hours\n\n10 min hits are always better than “nights of fun’ /losses at casinos\n",
"This depends largely on the machine and on the regulations regarding gaming in the jurisdiction of the shop that your machine is located in. If the machine is being operated legally in most jurisdictions it will have a random seed to choose a number and will have been examined and passed by the gaming board. They cannot be rigged to never land on your hand if you have bet a lot of money. The operator has to decide what the max he wants to be liable for paying out is, and set the maximum bets on the machine to allow for that. Roulette in general has a low probability of winning if you are betting numbers and not just red/black - one in 37 or one in 38 depending on the wheel being 0 or 00. You will also lose more on a machine than an actual wheel in the same time period because the spins happen at a much faster rate. You choose your bet and press spin and the machine simulates it, rather than needing to wait for all the players on the table to place their bets, waiting for the croupier to close the bets, press the button, and release the ball, all which takes time and makes the spins per hour go down. \n\n\nMany electronic gaming machines will actually have the odds of winning printed on a card somewhere on the machine. It may be denoted as a percent, in Las Vegas the minimum payout for any machine, if I remember correctly, is 85%, which means that 85% of all money placed in the machine will be paid back to the player. This doesn't mean that you as a player have an 85% *win* rate, it means that you will win 42.5% of hands and the casino will win 57.5% of hands, regardless of the actual bet placed. Such a machine would be said to give the house a 15% edge over the player.\n\nWhen choosing a machine to play at, you should examine the machine for any placards such as this that may be placed on it. Sometimes, you might see a wall of gaming machines that are the same game, with the same graphics and played the same way, but one has a placard stating that the payout is 85% and the one sitting *directly next to it* has a placard stating the payout is 95%. You want to play the one with the higher payout.\n\n\nOf course, if you're playing virtual roulette, the machine should be programmed to pick a number at random on the wheel and make that number the winning number. If the machine is programmed with the same pay table as a physical roulette wheel, then you should expect to win just as often or not. It should be noted that you should always, if possible, choose to play on a roulette wheel that has only one 0, as a 00 board actually increases the house edge. Betting on red or black seems to give you a 50% chance of winning, except it's not really, because if the wheel lands on 0 or 00 you lose both red and black bets. Of course, you can bet on 0/00 as well but you will lose that bet 36/37 times, and the payout is only 17 to 1.\n\nAddressing your original question though, no, any legitimate virtual gaming machine should never alter the odds of winning based on the amount of your bet."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1y9lhr | why was the t-mobile and sprint acquisition not okay and why is the comcast and time warner acquisition okay? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1y9lhr/why_was_the_tmobile_and_sprint_acquisition_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfiiyhs",
"cfij4uj",
"cfij6aj"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"it hasn't yet been ruled whether or not the Comcast/Time Warner deal is ok or not.",
"First of all, Comcast/Time Warner may not be OK. I believe the biggest difference is that there is little overlap in the two company's coverage. That means that few customers will actually see any change in competition. That obviously wouldn't be the case with a T-Mobile/Spring merger. I'm kind of curious about the future of CNN/NBC. It seems odd to have CNN, NBC, MSNBC, and CNBC all owned by the same company.",
"Well, there hasn't been a ruling yet, but here's a key reason:\n\nIn the other failed telecom mergers, those companies competed for the same customers. If AT & T had purchased T-Mobile, wireless customers would have had less choice in the marketplace.\n\nBut Comcast and Time Warner, in almost every case, do not compete for the same customers. Most Americans had exactly one choice for cable companies. For millions of them, that one choice is Comcast. For millions of others, that choice is Time Warner. After the merger, those customers will still have exactly one choice.\n\nChoice-depriving mergers are generally only permitted when one of the companies can't survive without the buyout (Sprint and Nextel) or when two companies have fragmented a small market to the point where neither can survive without a merger (Sirius and XM)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
32ydor | why are speaker cones conical? | I understand how speakers work. But why are they conical and not a flat planar diaphragm? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32ydor/eli5_why_are_speaker_cones_conical/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqfsyv2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A cone, like an arch, has more strength than a flat surface. A flat speaker has a tendency to deflect/bend when in use, causing distortions and potentially mechanical issues (coil crashing into the magnet from twisting, for instance). Using a cone/parabolic shape allows the maximum stiffness with the least material.\n\nYou can make flat speakers, many of the \"truck style\" slim subwoofers are a flat diaphragm. However, in order to be stiff enough, they've made the diaphragm much thicker than usual, resulting in less efficient speakers.\n\nThe exception to the rule is a planar transducer, like a \"ribbon tweeter\" or \"electrostatic loudspeaker\". These essentially use a conductive membrane between two screens that are charged with electricity to attract or repel the diaphragm, instead of a cone supported by a surround/spider and moved by a coil in a magnetic gap."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3qgp2d | how do companies such as beezid actually work? it sounds way to good to be true | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qgp2d/eli5how_do_companies_such_as_beezid_actually_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwezs0p",
"cwezvde",
"cwezxmt",
"cwf05wt"
],
"score": [
6,
6,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"You pay like $1 per bid, but each bid is only a penny toward the value. \n\nIf you get in a bidding war with several people on an iPad that's worth $500 and it sells for $6.37, that's 637 bids @ $1 each that beezid gets.. so they make $137 and get to claim they sold an item for $6.37.",
"You pay money to buy a stash of \"bids\" at a cost of roughly $0.60 per bid. Each time you \"spend\" a bid, you raise the price of the item by $0.01, become the current winner, *and lose that bid forever*. Every single bid costs you a non-refundable sixty cents, and if someone outbids you (and they will), then you've just thrown away that sixty cents. \n\nIf something like an iPad starts at $0.01, and rises to a price of $20, that's a total of 1999 bids. At $0.60 each, Beezid has earned $1199.40 *before the product has even sold*.",
"In penny auction sites like Beezid you have to buy bids. They usually cost a couple of dollars for about 10 or so bids, then each bid increases the items value a cent or so. So for every bid that is placed they probably make around 20-50 cents. ",
"Well that's some bullshit haha"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6hnhes | how are rockets mounted for a stationary test on the ground to prevent the rocket from flying away? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6hnhes/eli5_how_are_rockets_mounted_for_a_stationary/ | {
"a_id": [
"dizmz48"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They use a mint condition just printed child support documents and place them between the ground and rocket. Non detachable and works like a charm infinitely.."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
m4fet | 1st and 2nd order etc.. differential equations | Can someone please explain to me the difference between first and second and so on.... differential equations.
I understand the basics of differential equations and that first order equations are simpler than second order equations but thats it.
Thanks, | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/m4fet/1st_and_2nd_order_etc_differential_equations/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2y0fbi",
"c2y2er2",
"c2y0fbi",
"c2y2er2"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"First order differential equations contain only first derivatives of the variable. Second order equations contain second derivatives (and potentially first derivatives as well). The order, in general, corresponds to the highest derivative of the variable.\n",
"First order differential equations describe the 'growth' in the Original function at a given value of x. \n\nDifferential of the Second order do the same for the First. That means they show the *growth of the growth* in the original function. \n\nBoth second and first order differentials may be positive or negative for some value of *x*. If the first order differential is positive, the original function is sloping upwards. If the second order derivative is negative, the function is \"turning right/growing less\" as it's going forward in the x-direction. (and turning more and more right if the third order derivative is negative)",
"First order differential equations contain only first derivatives of the variable. Second order equations contain second derivatives (and potentially first derivatives as well). The order, in general, corresponds to the highest derivative of the variable.\n",
"First order differential equations describe the 'growth' in the Original function at a given value of x. \n\nDifferential of the Second order do the same for the First. That means they show the *growth of the growth* in the original function. \n\nBoth second and first order differentials may be positive or negative for some value of *x*. If the first order differential is positive, the original function is sloping upwards. If the second order derivative is negative, the function is \"turning right/growing less\" as it's going forward in the x-direction. (and turning more and more right if the third order derivative is negative)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
fjs033 | why were old school superhero cartoons so cheesy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fjs033/eli5_why_were_old_school_superhero_cartoons_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"fkoomek",
"fkoqjm5",
"fkotd5i"
],
"score": [
22,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"They were aimed at younger audiences, and at the time the idea was that little kids wouldn't want to watch something with complex and deep dialogue and writing. Superheroes were considered just for little kids, and the idea of writing them so that the parents watching with their kids would also find something enjoyable in it hadn't caught on. You needed a generation of kids who grew up watching cartoons to become writers and producers for that to happen.",
"The Comic Book Code (Comics Code, Comics Code Authority) was a regulatory arm of the Comics Magazine Association of America until about 2011. This commission had strict rules about what was acceptable in comic books, so things like violence, gore, horror, sexual innuendo, and the like were completely censored out, and because of that artists and writers just stopped putting them in.\n\nIt wasn't until fairly recently that you could sell a comic book without the CCA's stamp of approval, so basically only code-approved content came out until maybe the 60-'s and 70's started the underground \"graphic novel\" industry. It's also why there are basically only four comic book publishing companies prior to \\~1990 (Marvel, DC, Archie, and Bongo)\n\n & #x200B;\n\nHere's the full list of CCA criteria from 1954:\n\n* Crimes shall never be presented in such a way as to create sympathy for the criminal, to promote distrust of the forces of law and justice, or to inspire others with a desire to imitate criminals.\n* If crime is depicted it shall be as a sordid and unpleasant activity.\n* Policemen, judges, government officials, and respected institutions shall never be presented in such a way as to create disrespect for established authority.\n* Criminals shall not be presented so as to be rendered glamorous or to occupy a position which creates a desire for emulation.\n* In every instance good shall triumph over evil and the criminal punished for his misdeeds.\n* Scenes of excessive violence shall be prohibited. Scenes of brutal torture, excessive and unnecessary knife and gunplay, physical agony, the gory and gruesome crime shall be eliminated.\n* No comic magazine shall use the words \"horror\" or \"terror\" in its title.\n* All scenes of horror, excessive bloodshed, gory or gruesome crimes, depravity, lust, sadism, masochism shall not be permitted.\n* All lurid, unsavory, gruesome illustrations shall be eliminated.\n* Inclusion of stories dealing with evil shall be used or shall be published only where the intent is to illustrate a moral issue and in no case shall evil be presented alluringly, nor so as to injure the sensibilities of the reader.\n* Scenes dealing with, or instruments associated with walking dead, torture, vampires and vampirism, ghouls, cannibalism, and werewolfism are prohibited.\n* Profanity, obscenity, smut, vulgarity, or words or symbols which have acquired undesirable meanings are forbidden.\n* Nudity in any form is prohibited, as is indecent or undue exposure.\n* Suggestive and salacious illustration or suggestive posture is unacceptable.\n* Females shall be drawn realistically without exaggeration of any physical qualities.\n* Illicit sex relations are neither to be hinted at nor portrayed. Rape scenes, as well as sexual abnormalities, are unacceptable.\n* Seduction and rape shall never be shown or suggested.\n* Sex perversion or any inference to same is strictly forbidden.\n* Nudity with meretricious purpose and salacious postures shall not be permitted in the advertising of any product; clothed figures shall never be presented in such a way as to be offensive or contrary to good taste or morals.",
"In my thoughts, I also feel in part that it was a different place, a different time. Half the things we talk about today would be very different then. Like look at anything old school. As time goes on it just keeps getting more crazy."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
22qk3g | is there any way to find the curve of the earth using geometry, if so, how? | Just wondering if it is possible to find the angle in which the earth curves using Geometry. I would like to know how to ,as well, thanks. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22qk3g/eli5is_there_any_way_to_find_the_curve_of_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgpf15y"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Early calculations used the sun and shadows to help calculate the curvature of the Earth. Eratosthenes did this calculation using the shadows cast by the sun to find the angle of the earth's curvature, then he used the distance between those points to estimate the circumference of the Earth. He was fairly close, he guessed it was 25,000 miles when it's actually 24,902 miles.\n\nIf the points aren't on the same line of longitude (North/South), then you can still do it. In Euclidean (flat) space, triangles have 180 degrees. On curved surfaces, this isn't always true. Draw a \"triangle\" on the surface on the earth with two points on the equator and one on the North Pole. The angle between the points on the Equator and the North Pole is 90 degrees (the equator and lines of longitude are perpendicular). Just those two angles will be 180, and we still need to add the angle at the North Pole. Knowing these points, we can know the relative sizes of the triangle in terms of the sphere. Plug in one of the side lengths and we can know the sphere's curvature."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2r9j3i | if whisky needed a little water, wouldn't the distilleries add it? | Many people say to add a drop of water to "open up" the whisky or some other phrase that doesn't seem to have any science behind it (I would just say "dilute"). Is there any scientific reason why adding water immediately before drinking would be any different than adding it before bottling? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2r9j3i/eli5_if_whisky_needed_a_little_water_wouldnt_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cndqc8h",
"cndql49"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Some people like whiskey with a drop of water, some people do not. It is personal taste. However if the whiskey manufactures were to add in the drop of water then there would no longer be a choice. It is easy to add a drop of water at a bar, it is impossible to remove it. ",
"There are as many types of whiskeys/whiskys as there are brands of soda. Some whiskey has a strong peat taste to it which is sometimes revered and some times reviled. Water is a way to cut the taste to suit the individuals preference. I recommend trying your whiskey both ways to see if it makes a difference for your enjoyment. If neither are tasty, consider trying a different brand. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3169ah | how did every culture on the planet at some point in their ancient history invent the concept of teas? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3169ah/eli5_how_did_every_culture_on_the_planet_at_some/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpypv0g",
"cpypyag",
"cpyrik2"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Not every culture did. Some figured out that if you dip certain leaves in hot water, it tastes good, and some learned it from other cultures.\n\nThe concept of tea is relatively simple. It's not much of a stretch for every culture to figure it out on their own.",
"Putting something into hot water doesn't take much ingenuity.",
"I'm not sure why you think every culture invented tea. It's well known and well documented that tea was invented in China and spread from there. I have never heard anybody believe otherwise (except in the other answers given to your question). In fact, we can track when and how it was spread pretty well. It's pretty incredible how bad some of the answers give here are.\n\nAll varieties of tea plants are of the genus camellia sinensis, which were originally used for tea in China. \n\nOne of the biggest catalysts for Tea being exported was the [Tea Horse Route](_URL_2_), where Tea was traded from China to neighboring countries for horses. \n\n[Since tea was first discovered in China, it has traveled the world conquering the thirsts of virtually every country on the planet. - The History of Tea, Teavana](_URL_1_)\n\nA quick google search and [wikipedia](_URL_0_) will give you a good understanding of the answer you are looking for. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_tea",
"http://www.teavana.com/tea-info/history-of-tea",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_tea_route"
]
] |
||
3uyh9u | developed nation, undeveloped nation, first world, third world: what information do these terms convey, and how do we use them correctly? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3uyh9u/eli5_developed_nation_undeveloped_nation_first/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxisyo9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"TECHNICALLY the first world are developed capitalist nations that were vaguely alligned with the US after ww2, basically anyone on the US side in the cold war, and the 2nd world are all those nations alligned with the USSR after ww2 i.e. communist nations. The 3rd world is anyone who remained neutral. Due to the nature of the conflict nearly every developed nation had \"picked sides\" so the 3rd world tends to refer to underdeveloped nations who simply had no stake in this game, however this leads to developed nations like ireland and finland to be technically 3rd world."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2fhlr2 | why do car dealerships (both foreign and domestic) fly huge american flags? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fhlr2/eli5why_do_car_dealerships_both_foreign_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck99oxj",
"ck99qka",
"ck9a7a0",
"ck9ag65"
],
"score": [
8,
5,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Trying to cash in on the patriotism of consumers. ",
"To take advantage of the less intelligent public.",
"To attract your attention. (And it worked, apparently!) ",
"I think [this video](_URL_0_) does a pretty good job showing the kind of sentiment they're trying to get across."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX5ZRE26YWM"
]
] |
||
2vm1eh | what is a "haircut" in economic terms? | My crude guess is that it means if somebody owed me $100, then if I were to sell that debt to somebody else, the "haircut" is the percentage difference in what I'm owed and what I expect to get, at current market values. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vm1eh/eli5what_is_a_haircut_in_economic_terms/ | {
"a_id": [
"coivbw1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Close. It's when someone puts up collateral for a debt. It's a percentage subtraction from the total value of the collateral, based on the risk of the collateral holding its value. More stable collateral would have a smaller haircut. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
63c3cr | what happens in the brain during those 10 seconds when you wake up and you don't even know who you are. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/63c3cr/eli5_what_happens_in_the_brain_during_those_10/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfsyz3w",
"dft0dzq"
],
"score": [
10,
7
],
"text": [
"Think of your brain like a computer. When you turn a computer on, it doesn't start running right away. It has to boot up first, filling up various bits of the computer with the memory that makes it able to show you cat videos.\n\nWhen you wake up, it's kind of like your brain rebooting.",
"There are different regions of the brain that do different things. The brain region right at the base, close to your neck, has a lot in common with monkeys. It can control your limbs, perceive danger, and is very fast. \n\nSpeech and memory are much nearer the top and are a bit slower running. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2cc73j | why movies with good screenplays only have one or two writers, while the typical (and bad) blockbuster scripts often have up to three to four writers? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cc73j/eli5_why_movies_with_good_screenplays_only_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjdzkly",
"cjdzwid",
"cjdzzg2",
"cje1f6b"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because with more writers some movies tend to get written and rewritten, to the point that the story makes no sense anymore. An example would be [Prometheus](_URL_0_), which was passed repeatedly between two writers. Obviously a screenplay with one or two writers would be more \"focused\". Of course that does not always apply, but that's a pretty realistic scenario.",
"If a screenplay needs that many rewrites it probably wasn't too coherent to begin with.",
"A single writer, or a duo, are probably more in sync. Having more writers usually means that there was something wrong with the original script, and it needed to be improved upon. Note that there's a difference between \" & \" and \"and\" in the credits for hollywood movies.\n\nA \" & \" between names means that they worked together, \"and\" that they came in at another time and fixed/rewrote parts. For example, \"Written by: Ube & Kame and TheCaperman\" means that the team \"Ube\" and \"Kame\" worked together, then at some other time \"TheCaperman\" also worked on it (without \"Ube and Kame\").\n\n_URL_0_\n",
"You end up with a diluted artistic vision. A single writer knows and understands their characters and plot inside out, and can devote every single word in the script to bringing that out.\n\nWith two writers they have to communicate and make sure that their interpretations of the characters are the same. But they can also bounce ideas off each other. However, if they disagree on something important or disagree on too many things then they try to pull the script in different directions, and it doesn't make sense.\n\nWith three or four writers this is far more likely to happen: you only need one writer who doesn't get it to ruin things."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-behind-the-scenes-features-that-show-why-movies-went-wrong/"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WGA_screenwriting_credit_system"
],
[]
] |
||
9e87xq | why do certain foods cause food comas, but not others? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9e87xq/eli5_why_do_certain_foods_cause_food_comas_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"e5my6x4"
],
"score": [
23
],
"text": [
"When you eat a really big meal, of any type of food really, you'll probably feel tired and sluggish afterwards, the \"food coma\". This is due to your body diverting blood and energy to start digesting the large load of food. Your body will also release Insulin, a hormone that will help process and store the food for use by your body. Both these things can make you sleep and cause the feeling of food coma. \n\nNow the reason why you might associate some foods with causing this, and not others, is a more interesting question. I would imagine that these foods tend to be foods that \n\n* Are easily overeaten\n\n* Are often overeaten due to ceremony (Thanksgiving, Christmas)\n\n* Contain an unusual amount of carbs or protein\n\n* Are eaten at somewhat unusual times for you\n\nSo examples might be the common Thanksgiving feast, which contains vast amounts of Turkey, stuffing, potatoes, eaten in unusually excessive quantities, and often at an unusual hour (like 2 pm?). \n\nAnother might be a blowout brunch, where you have pancakes with syrup, eggs, bacon, muffin etc. It's way more food than you'd usually have for breakfast, slightly later than usual (brunch is like 11-12), and it again contains a shockingly large amount of sugar which will spike your insulin. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
29qzz6 | why does the electronic staticy sound my tv (which is hooked up to my computer) makes change when i open programs, go full screen for videos or cycle through firefox windows? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29qzz6/eli5_why_does_the_electronic_staticy_sound_my_tv/ | {
"a_id": [
"cino21y"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"does the cable connecting your pc and tv have a ferrite bead on it? _URL_0_\n\nyou are hearing 'noise' generated by the electronic circuits in your system leaking into the audio amplifier in the tv. when you ask the computer to do something different parts of the computer spring into action, the cpu, hd, ram, etc and they each demand a little more energy from the power supply to do their thing. this can generate fluctuations in the electronic noise radiating from the various components which is picked up and amplified by the audio amp much like how a radio works."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_bead"
]
] |
||
ak628n | if when a baby had jaundice, they can do phototherapy, why can’t jaundice in adult be treated the same way? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ak628n/eli5_if_when_a_baby_had_jaundice_they_can_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"ef25cp5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Jaundice in babies is caused by the babies immature liver not being able to handle the breakdown of fetal haemoglobin as it is replaced by adult haemoglobin. The breakdown of haemoglobin makes bilirubin which the liver attaches to other molecules so it can leave the body. Light helps breakdown bilirubin. Severe jaundice in babies is bad as it can cause brain damage called kernicterus. \n\nIn adults, jaundice usually happens because of liver failure or the abnormal breakdown of blood (hemolysis).\n\nThus in babies the cause for the jaundice and the reason the liver can't take it away are temporary. In adults they are less likely to be so, so you fix the cause instead and the jaundice itself doesn't have such severe consequences, the cause of it does. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
faq9np | why do certain musical notes harmonize? | I've struggled the understand the mechanism by which (and reason why) notes harmonize. I know most of music is math so that's probably why I can't figure it out. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/faq9np/eli5_why_do_certain_musical_notes_harmonize/ | {
"a_id": [
"fizrxcr",
"fizs587"
],
"score": [
10,
6
],
"text": [
"It's the relative position of the peaks and troughs of the wave form. If a second pitch has a waveform that will align a peak frequently, then the sound is considered pleasant. Two notes that are dissonant would have peaks that only aligned after a great number or cycles, which is why dissonant notes have different rates at which they \"warble\".\n\nNot the most eloquent answer, but that's basically it.",
"Each note is a certain wavelength. When notes fail to harmonize they don’t fall within a frequency that allows them to vibrate in harmony. Take a note, same note different octave. These notes will overlap very frequently because an octave is a multiplication of the given frequency. A C2 will harmonize, or line up, every 2nd rise/fall of a C3 note. \n\nIf two notes rarely line up, they don’t harmonize. This is actually pretty easy to hear with older electronic keyboards - play two notes that don’t harmonize and listen carefully - the sound will change as you listen, as if the notes themselves aren’t constant - you’re hearing the notes eventually meeting. \n\nIf you have an iPhone, I find Garage Band can show this off really well - it sounds like the volume of the chord is moving up and down with a rather unpleasant wobble.\n\nFunny enough a harmony is defined as having balanced dissonance - which itself means a lack of harmony - and consonance. I know that can sound a bit confusing but it basically just means even if mathematically two notes don’t line up all the time, they line up often enough that we hear harmony.\n\nChords consisting of more than 2 notes can also have harmony by two dissonant tones lining up with a third tone, or a cycle of the three."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3rf9l7 | pixel resolution, and the difference between 1080p, 2k, 4k, and 10-bit | I understand that resolution refers to the number of pixels on a screen/picture/video, but what are the other 3, and how are they different than say 1080p? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rf9l7/eli5_pixel_resolution_and_the_difference_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwnk1ee",
"cwnkbcj"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"2K and 4K refer to resolutions higher than 1080. 4K is exactly 4x the resolution of 1080p at a resolution of 3840x2160. \n\n2K is only slightly higher than 1080p but it is a different aspect ratio, a resolution of 2048×1080.\n\n10-bit refers to the color space of the image and has nothing to do with resolution. Most consumer TVs display 8 bit color which is capable of 16 million colors. 10-bit color is capable of 68 billion colors.",
"1080p, 2k and 4k are all resolutions. 2k and 1080p are approximately equal (as 2k is the number of columns of pixels, 1080 is the number of rows of pixels). 4k, (also columns) has twice as many rows as 2k, so there are 4 times as many pixels (it also has twice as many colums).\n\n10 bit is the amount of information per pixel, which effectively says how many colors/brightnesses can be shown. 1 bit would be black and white, each pixel is either black or white, 3 bits would mean each of the 3 colors that can make a pixel could be on or off, giving 8 possible color combinations."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
nn8ts | how can someone be acquitted of murdering someone, but still be found guilty in a civil suit? e.g. oj simpson. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/nn8ts/eli5_how_can_someone_be_acquitted_of_murdering/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3aesb1",
"c3aew6c",
"c3afcpj",
"c3ag4fv",
"c3aibc7",
"c3ajvln",
"c3aesb1",
"c3aew6c",
"c3afcpj",
"c3ag4fv",
"c3aibc7",
"c3ajvln"
],
"score": [
3,
26,
6,
2,
5,
4,
3,
26,
6,
2,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"One takes 12 to agree, the other takes a substantially less majority. And different lawyers...",
"To win a criminal case, it would have had to be proved *beyond a reasonable doubt* that OJ did it. To win the civil case, it just had to be proved that he did it more likely than not.",
"Well, they were two different charges. He was acquitted of murder, but found liable for wrongful death in the civil trial. Could someone who understands this part of the law better than I do explain the difference between murder and wrongful death?",
" hmm, just wondering, is it possible to be tried for the same crime if it's a civil and a criminal case or does double jeopardy still apply?",
"if you get convicted at a criminal trial you go to prison, in a civil trial you just lose your money, so they make it harder to convict in a criminal court (prison being viewed as worse than writing someone a check).",
"Very simplified version:\n\nIn a criminal trial, the standard that the state must prove is that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. (A survey of federal district judges in one district quantified this as low as 76% and as high as 95%). A criminal charge is brought by the state against an individual. The reason why the burden of proof is so high is because our society and Constitution want to make sure that when we take away someone's life or liberty, we give them a number of protections. A criminal conviction also carries with it a moral stigma - the condemnation of the rest of society.\n\nIn a civil action, the standard that the plaintiff (the party bringing the action) must prove is preponderance of the evidence (i.e., more likely than not). Sometimes this is said to be quantified at 50% + 1 - the Plaintiff will win if the scale tip ever so slightly in his favor. A civil action is typically brought by a private party against another private party. (This may be a corporation, like a business or association, or an individual).# The reason why the burden of proof is comparably low is because in a civil case, nobody's life or liberty is being taken away - all that is usually at stake is money (there is reputation, time, and so forth, but the main issue is money). A civil judgment against you also isn't considered to bring the same stigma that a criminal conviction does.",
"One takes 12 to agree, the other takes a substantially less majority. And different lawyers...",
"To win a criminal case, it would have had to be proved *beyond a reasonable doubt* that OJ did it. To win the civil case, it just had to be proved that he did it more likely than not.",
"Well, they were two different charges. He was acquitted of murder, but found liable for wrongful death in the civil trial. Could someone who understands this part of the law better than I do explain the difference between murder and wrongful death?",
" hmm, just wondering, is it possible to be tried for the same crime if it's a civil and a criminal case or does double jeopardy still apply?",
"if you get convicted at a criminal trial you go to prison, in a civil trial you just lose your money, so they make it harder to convict in a criminal court (prison being viewed as worse than writing someone a check).",
"Very simplified version:\n\nIn a criminal trial, the standard that the state must prove is that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. (A survey of federal district judges in one district quantified this as low as 76% and as high as 95%). A criminal charge is brought by the state against an individual. The reason why the burden of proof is so high is because our society and Constitution want to make sure that when we take away someone's life or liberty, we give them a number of protections. A criminal conviction also carries with it a moral stigma - the condemnation of the rest of society.\n\nIn a civil action, the standard that the plaintiff (the party bringing the action) must prove is preponderance of the evidence (i.e., more likely than not). Sometimes this is said to be quantified at 50% + 1 - the Plaintiff will win if the scale tip ever so slightly in his favor. A civil action is typically brought by a private party against another private party. (This may be a corporation, like a business or association, or an individual).# The reason why the burden of proof is comparably low is because in a civil case, nobody's life or liberty is being taken away - all that is usually at stake is money (there is reputation, time, and so forth, but the main issue is money). A civil judgment against you also isn't considered to bring the same stigma that a criminal conviction does."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
28dkv4 | why can't i eat or drink anything before surgery. | Just had a minor surgery that required general anaesthetic, why couldn't I eat or drink for a few hours before? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28dkv4/eli5_why_cant_i_eat_or_drink_anything_before/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci9vlcc",
"ci9vltf",
"ci9w5nt",
"ci9w8d4",
"ci9w8w8",
"ci9whsa",
"ci9xgcu",
"ci9yjh6",
"ci9ysls",
"cia3fln",
"cia6hjh",
"ciac9qy",
"ciacap2"
],
"score": [
73,
25,
2,
8,
3,
3,
672,
11,
3,
11,
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There was a post on the front page of imgur today that had a story of a mom who fed scrambled eggs to her daughter before a surgery. The daughter threw up the eggs and they got into her lungs, causing serious complications and aborting the surgery. Edit: (sorry, at work, can't link it because imgur is blocked.) ",
"Because they don't want you throwing up while you're unconscious. If that happened, it'd be easy for you to inhale some of your vomit into your lungs, which is generally a bad thing. It's tough to deal with that in a person that's been put under, because their body might not respond appropriately to clear the lungs. ",
"Like the others have already said ... so that you don't choke on your chuck. While under anaesthetic body functions like digestion stop so the food can putrify and be vomited up.",
"It is because of the drugs that the anesthesiologist administers to sedate the patient. Many of which can cause the patient to vomit. This poses a choking hazard as usually surgeries are performed while the patient is on their back. Also factor in that the patient doesn't know they are vomiting and will keep breathing which means that can inadvertently inhale their own vomit thus choking. ",
"I can attest that even after a general anesthetic you are liable to throw up. One had a general, couple of hours after i came round drank some orange juice...it didn't stick round long in my tum!",
"Aspiration. Can cause everything from difficulty breathing to death. ",
"Doctor here typing on my phone, so excuse any typos \n\n\n\n1)Nausea and vomiting and very common side effects, and it's way more convenient and pleasant for everyone if nothing comes out.\n\n\n\n2) before I explain, it's important to realize that the esophagus and trachea are right next to each other, with only the epiglottis to cover the trachea when you swallow, ensuring that food and water go into the stomach. After the anesthesiologist sedates you and you drift off to sleep, a paralytic is given to you so that all of your muscles relax, making intubation easier. Unfortunately, this means that they have to breathe for you in the small time window in between injecting the paralytic, and actually intubating you. This process involves holding a mask over your mouth and nose, and pumping 100% oxygen to fully oxygenate your blood. This means that air is forced down the path of least resistance. Hopefully most of the air goes down the trachea and into your lungs, but it is unavoidable that some goes down the esophagus into the stomach. This means that as the anesthesiologist is trying to pump air into our lungs, your stomach is also slowly getting pumped full too. If the patient has anything in their stomach (even water), this stomach contents can easily reflux since the air is pushing things around. This reflux, aka vomit, comes up through the esophagus, but can't leave your mouth because you are lying down. Instead, the contents can only fall down the trachea into the lungs. This can cause a chemical pneumonitis is from there acidic stomach contents, or even worse, an aspiration pneumonia. Bad news bears.\n\nEDIT: I am a urologist, meaning that I am a surgeon. A urologists scope of practice is huge, doing ANYTHING surgical involving the kidneys, ureter, bladder, and prostate, and all its connecting bits. We take care of all demographics, ranging from Pediatrics, oncology, fertility, robotics, stones, voiding dysfunction, neurourology, and trauma/reconstruction.\nThere has been interest expressed about an AMA, Would anyone really want an AMA regarding someone to operates on the Genitourinary system?",
"I was told it was to prevent vomiting and choking on the vomit, a lot of the anesthetics can induce vomiting in patients. \n\nI vomited on morphine, so I didn't have a hard time believing.",
"So you dont vomit during surgery. Not only can you choke on it, but it can go into your lungs, and just creates more issues as a whole. \n\nThat being said a simple google of this would have given you the answer... ",
"As an anesthesiologist, I feel that I should also add that merely chewing gum or eating hard candies can cause your stomach to begin producing digestive enzymes and stomach acid, which also puts you at risk for aspirating and causing pneumonia/ARDS. You don't have to have actual food or drink in your stomach in order to have these problems. Nothing by mouth really means nothing by mouth. You also don't need the anesthesiologist to try to breathe air into your lungs I'm order to aspirate. In fact, the majority of aspirations are from passive reflux that occurs either going under or coming out of anesthesia. Fortunately these are generally benign in small volumes.",
"Anesthesiologist here- it's recommended to not eat or drink for varying amounts of time simply to give your body time to empty your stomach prior to the anesthetic- not because of the nausea risk itself but to limit the risk of acidic stomach contents entering your lungs (aspiration) during any portion of the anesthetic. This risk is highest during the induction (when you go to sleep) or any other time our sedation makes you incapable of protecting your own airway. Very generally, the guidelines state to not eat for 8 hrs before, no milk 6 hrs prior, and no clear liquids within 2 hrs of any anesthetic.",
"ELI5 answer: So that you won't puke anything up and choke or suffocate yourself when they put the breathing tube down your throat.",
"When you go under general anesthesia, sometimes you throw up--just enough to drown on your vomit and not enough for the doctors to notice and save you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2ho0q1 | what happens when someone dies to access their password-secured accounts (e.g. checking account, email, financial portfolio)? | Is there some legal construct that enables a will executor, for example, to access a dead person's account(s)? Do they just call Wells Fargo and say, "hey this guy died we need access to his stuff"?
What about email and personal files locked down on someone's computer?
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ho0q1/eli5_what_happens_when_someone_dies_to_access/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckufddz"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"\nI used to do wills/estates before moving to IT/IP, so here's how it works:\n\n1. You can only use a Power of Attorney when the person is alive. Once they are deceased, a PoA is no longer valid and the attorney/executor must derive their authority from the Will.\n\n1a. If the testator is still alive, the Power of Attorney for Property (or Medical Care; there's always two types of POA) presents proof of incapacity to the bank and is then given signing authority. John Doe has Power of Attorney for Bob Smith, so Doe can sign Smith's cheques for him, for example. \n\nBanks are quite sensitive to fraud and elder abuse though, so it's not a quick process. Usually a letter from a lawyer is required to get things moving.\n\n2. For an executor named in a Will to gain access to a bank account, the will must be probated through the courts, a notarized copy of the death certificate and will presented to the bank, and an \"estate account\" opened. After probate, the executor is then responsible for liquidating and distributing assets per the terms of the will.\n\n3. For social media, etc.. it's sort of the same deal, except a lot more annoying. You can send the company a letter w/ proof of death and proof of appointment as executor, but their policy might be to just delete the account upon notice of death. IIRC Facebook and some phone companies used to do this with deceased Iraq/Afghanistan war vets.\n\nWhat is recommended is creating a list of all social media accounts and passwords while still living and leave them with the power of attorney and will. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3i8ryo | how does carbon dioxide make stuff taste better when it is supposed to be harmful? | Side note: I've heard co2 be called 'poisonous' before. That has to be false, as we breathe it all the time. Maybe they were confused with co even though that is not poisonous, but can asphyxiate. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i8ryo/eli5_how_does_carbon_dioxide_make_stuff_taste/ | {
"a_id": [
"cue9w8b"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Side note first: CO² **is** poisenous.\nOur body is **ex**haling it as a waste product. We are just tolerating a certain amount of it (up to 4%...normallly it is around 0.04%)\n\nMain question: CO² is added to conserve a product, since bacteria that use oxygen and dispose CO² are hampered if they live in a CO² rich environment.\nBut CO² is also working as an acid when dissolves it in water- and that changes the taste of things. Whether you like it or not is rather individual."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4xwt48 | why do men run the 110 meter hurdles while women run only 100 meters? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4xwt48/eli5why_do_men_run_the_110_meter_hurdles_while/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6j422l"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Historically, the lengths of the hurdle events varied greatly for both men and women. The men's even settled into 10 hurdles and 110m, while the women did 8 over 80m.\n\nIn the 1960s, they experimented with increasing the number of hurdles in the women's event to 10, and experimented with various distances. They settled on 100m, which has been used since the 1968 Olympics.\n\nHurdlers have to match their pacing with the hurdles so they will them in stride. Likely 100m works better than 110m, as women tend to be shorter than men."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
20vb46 | why in advanced physics can you only know a particles speed or location (but not both) | I remember reading in a book, I believe it was called Physics for Future Presidents that in really advanced physics (light or quantum or particle or something) that you can only know a particles speed or it's location but never both at the same time.
Why is this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20vb46/eli5_why_in_advanced_physics_can_you_only_know_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg72su1"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
" > Why in advanced physics can you only know a particles speed OR location (but not both)\n\nSo in physics this is called the [uncertainty principle](_URL_0_), and it stems from the fact that objects have both particle-like and wave-like properties.\n\nLet's make an analogy. Imagine that you drop a stone into a lake, and ripples spread out from the point where you drop it. Now say that you want to know both the position and the wavelength of the ripples.\n\nWell, the instant the stone enters the water, the position of the wave is obvious. It's right there! But you can't calculate a wavelength, because the ripples haven't spread out yet. If you wait a few seconds, you can easily measure the wavelength, but the position is now all spread out. You cannot measure both the position and the wavelength at the same time, because they don't *exist* at the same time.\n\nWell, the same type of relationship applies to the position and momentum of subatomic particles. They are Fourier transforms of each other. So not only can you not know both the position and momentum at the same time, but the particles don't *have* a well-defined position and momentum at the same time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle"
]
] |
|
3ndyke | whatever happened to esperanto? | It was big in the 20th century and now we never hear about it. What gives? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ndyke/eli5_whatever_happened_to_esperanto/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvn5e7o",
"cvn5liu",
"cvnlk7s",
"cvnmp9x",
"cvnqfng",
"cvox0l6"
],
"score": [
19,
9,
32,
12,
5,
6
],
"text": [
"I don't think it was ever really big. It was an intriguing concept that never really gained traction.",
"Yeah, it was never really big. It had a decent-sized following -- almost a cult-following kind of thing, but it never really took off. The thing is, it wasn't really needed. There were already languages that are immensely popular and understood in vast portions of the world. When not, there are interpreters. \n\nWhat's more, while Esperanto is *extremely* easy to learn for people who speak languages like Spanish and English, it does *not* offer the same ease to people who speak languages like Mandarin or Cantonese. \n\nIt's basically a nice idea, but incredibly hard to implement, and not incredibly necessary. ",
"Esperanto is alive and well in the 21st Century with a lively community on the internet. The new course on language-learning site Duolingo is proving extremely popular, the Esperanto wikipedia has more articles than many natural language editions and social media are making it easier than ever for Esperanto users across the world to connect. Esperanto is significantly easier to learn than any natural language and can serve as a useful introduction to language learning. There was a very good Tedx Talk on this: _URL_0_\nFar from being dead and buried, it may well be that Esperanto is an idea whose time has come.",
"I agree with richardthemethodist, Esperanto is very much alive. There are people who speak it all across the globe and there are also some people who have been raised with it as one of their primary languages (There's a video interviewing some of these native speakers: _URL_0_). Some of these native speakers are only alive because their parents met at esperanto conventions. The DuoLingo beta course recently reached over 20,000 learners in its first week and is currently at over 100,000 learners (_URL_1_). Far from being dead, I think Esperanto is finally going to get some more exposure, though it has obviously survived pretty well without mainstream exposure for the past 128 years.",
"Like others said, Esperanto is alive and has survived, it's not \"dying\", but in my opinion, the problems is that esperanto associations do not success to reach the general public. They are trying hard but it just does not work.\n The first point would be that the general public at least know that Esperanto (still) exist, but even that simple thing is harder to do in the 21st century that it was in the 20th. I've met a lot of people like you who thinks that Esperanto is dead because they doesn't hear anymore about it. Younger people doesn't even know the word \"Esperanto\".\n",
"Esperanto has communities of thousands of speakers in Poland and Hungary, has native speakers of its own, is huge in Brasil, has news services coming out of China (El Popola Chinio), has had currencies, there's a school (Instituto Zamenhof) that teaches children in Esperanto as a second language in Togo (Africa), has a global couch surfing service, and an incresing amount of youtube celebrities. And it's about to grow exponentially now that duolingo has over 140,000+ learners. If you think Esperanto is dead, especially now in the information era, you haven't done your research! No universal language candidate has organically produced a grassroots cosmopolitan culture of this kind in history. It's just beginning to show its potential ..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/8gSAkUOElsg"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzDS2WyemBI",
"https://incubator.duolingo.com/courses/eo/en/status"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
1f612v | liberalism | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1f612v/eli5liberalism/ | {
"a_id": [
"ca74o8i",
"ca756z1",
"ca77kzj",
"ca77zqb"
],
"score": [
4,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Classic Liberalism or Progressive Liberalism?",
"More information might be needed. What's considered \"liberal\" varies somewhat from country to country.",
"Political ideologies broadly characterized by their basic concern for equality.",
"A political belief (or ideology) that power should be distributed as broadly as possible in a society, rather than concentrated among some sort of elite class. Historically, the elite class was an aristocracy, and liberals in the UK led the transfer of power away from the aristocracy to the common people. In modern times, the elite class tends more to be owing to economic power. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2msqxu | if someone were farsighted in one eye and nearsighted in the other, wouldn't they just balance out? | This just came up in conversation, and no one can supply a valid answer. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2msqxu/eli5_if_someone_were_farsighted_in_one_eye_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm77yh0",
"cm78iuk"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"You aren't viewing the farsighted lens' vision through the nearsighted lens, to correct the farsightedness, or vice versa. \n\nYou've got a farsighted (out of focus) image, and a near-sighted (out of focus) image. Two out of focus images. ",
"They make bifocal contact lenses, but those don't work well for some people.\n\nSome eye doctors will also try [monovision](_URL_0_), which uses one lens in the dominant eye focused for distance vision, and one lens in the other eye focused for reading vision.\n\nIt's not perfect, but the brain will usually compensate, along you decent distance vision and the ability to read without adding separate reading glasses.\n\nIn a similar manner, the brain can also compensate for someone who's naturally nearsighted in one eye and farsighted in the other, although there are limits. When the difference gets bad enough, you'll need some sort of corrective action (glasses, contacts, laser, etc.)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.allaboutvision.com/contacts/monovision.htm"
]
] |
|
97b394 | how do huge hotels like cesar's palace or the bellagio provide wifi for 1000's of rooms? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/97b394/eli5_how_do_huge_hotels_like_cesars_palace_or_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"e46tyz9",
"e46vrff",
"e46x4gz"
],
"score": [
4,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"They have wireless access points through the entire building to cover all the rooms and usually one around the pool area as well.",
"If you had a big garden and wanted to water all of your plants it would take too long to use one house, so you would split the hose to create multiple paths of water. And at the end of each house you wouldn't just let the water pour out in one steam, but put a sprinkler in it to distribute the spray. If your garden was big enough you might have a control center that limits the flow of some hoses to make sure all of the hoses keep pressure. \n\nIt's a similar idea to provide network access for thousands of people. The sprinklers are access points that work on radio frequencies to spread and distribute the connections. The access points (APs) are connected to cat-5 or cat-6 which is a type of cable that lets the network information flow through it like a hose does with water. The cables connect to a switch which is the control center that balances the network traffic to ensure everyone has a good connection. ",
"Same way universities and large corporations do. A wired network with lots of wired access points and managing the overlap of competing frequencies and power levels."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
fc5pdt | how does a touch screen detect touches under glass? | It's like magic, how do it work?? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fc5pdt/eli5_how_does_a_touch_screen_detect_touches_under/ | {
"a_id": [
"fj8plll"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"It measures capacitance. Your finger is conductive. The \"glass\" is non-conductive. There is a layer of transparent conductor under the glass. Wherever your finger touches, a capacitor forms -- an area capable of holding an electric charge. By reading the capacitance of each area of the screen, it can determine where it is being touched. This is why non-conductive object such as styluses do not register as touches."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4mvpn2 | why are airplane controls so god damnned complicated?? | Airplane cabins have a million buttons and levers and switches... are they really necessary? With the technology we have today, can't we make airplanes that are more or less intuitive to use, like cars? If this is possible, why didn't we make it already? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4mvpn2/eli5why_are_airplane_controls_so_god_damnned/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3yojek",
"d3yolu7",
"d3yp3kb",
"d3yqt33",
"d3yrjro"
],
"score": [
4,
8,
3,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"In modern configurations of aircraft, there are four basic controls - elevator (pitch), rudder (yaw), ailerons (roll), and throttle (power). Then there are the systems necessary to produce these four basic controls, and on top of that Radios, navigation, environmental controls and an assortment of other necessary tools.\n\nA good deal of the complexity comes from the necessity of redundancy, as leaving a pilot without options is considered kinda inhumane. ",
"In addition to all of the aeronautical controls, airplanes have many systems for lighting, radio, fuel controls, navigation, intercoms, oxygen and more. Plus, lots of these systems have backups and redundancies, all of which have to have controls. Many have different controls for left and right. \n\n[Read more about airplane controls here](_URL_0_)\n\nIf you think about it, your car has a hell of a lot of controls as well, once you include radios, navigation (which may be on your phone), and all of the lights and things.",
"I would equate it to those giant sound consoles you see at venues.\n\nPeople usually say something like, \"wow, look at all those buttons! How do you know what each one does?\".\n\nIn reality, it's not nearly as complicated as it looks. Usually each single function more or less has its own knob or button.\n\nThink of it like this, imagine if every single setting and option on your phone had its own button, knob, or slider. That would probably make your phone appear overly complicated. ",
"We already did. Many airliners used to require a 3rd person in the cockpit just to monitor and maintain the engines. What's now displayed on a single [display](_URL_1_) used to be 4 or 5 separate mechanical gauges (though some planes include both the screen and the gauges as a backup). \n\nCompare a modern [787 cockpit](_URL_2_) to an old [707 cockpit](_URL_0_) (note the flight engineer's position on the right).\n\nIn general the buttons are positioned based on importance and frequency of use. The switches on the ceiling are for things like the lights and hydraulic pumps, while the more visible ones are for things like the autopilot, radio, and inputs for the computerized displays. ",
"I should point out that a lot of the buttons you see are probably actually circuit breakers. Your car has those too, just not in a driver accessible location.\n\nAnother thing to point out is that both pilots have a full set of controls each, so a lot of them are redundant. There's not as much stuff as it might look like.\n\nAlso, all the engine controls, as well as engine equipment controls for stuff like hydraulics, generators, etc. Is also duplicated on multi engine jets whereas your car only has one engine.\n\nThe airplane also has several systems your car doesn't have. Flaps, spoilers, autopilot, APU, anti-ice, landing gear, navigation... the list goes on. Whereas the plane has most of the systems your car has; wipers, lights, heaters/ac, radio, clock, etc. (That pretty much covers a typical car dash).\n\nThe buttons are necessary, but most of them are only occasionally used. It's really not that bad though it looks intimidating to the uninitiated."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.quora.com/What-do-all-the-controls-in-an-airplanes-cockpit-do"
],
[],
[
"http://www.airliners.net/photo/Lufthansa/Boeing-707-430/2495151/L/&sid=608d208f38965fd0349a3b52eb011d3c",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_flight_display",
"http://www.airliners.net/photo/Qatar-Airways/Boeing-787-8-Dreamliner/2793096/L/&sid=6eeb24d4b47f17395b8a2f2855c6ca9c"
],
[]
] |
|
6egy0f | how is high salt intake "bad for you" if the japanese eat so much of it and have the life expectancy they do? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6egy0f/eli5_how_is_high_salt_intake_bad_for_you_if_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dia6v0d",
"dia762a",
"diaa9ai",
"diab9nw"
],
"score": [
17,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It isn't, unless you have an existing heart condition.\n\nHigh-salt meals cause a short-term rise in blood pressure. For much of the late 20th century it was believed that long-term salt intake caused chronic high blood pressure. Chronic high blood pressure is known to cause health problems. But research in the last few years is showing that the link between salt intake and chronic high blood pressure was mistaken.\n\nIf you have heart problems, the short-term increase in BP can cause complications. But if you don't, there's nothing wrong with a high salt intake.",
"The Japanese diet also includes plenty of fish and vegetables, which have known positive impacts on health.",
"The relative healthiness of the Japanese is due to a huge number of factors. Their meals, while containing decent amounts of salt, are in small portions and are also are rich in omega-3 fatty acids from seafood, which can help prevent heart disease.\nHigh salt intake is \"bad for you\" because it can temporarily increase your blood pressure. When this is combined with a sedentary lifestyle, diabetes, smoking, or a diet made heavily of processed foods (all of which are more common in Western nations than Japan), your risk of developing chronic high blood pressure, which can cause damage to your heart, kidneys, eyes, and brain, increases. \nGenetics also plays a huge role in your risk of developing hypertension and certain ethnicities have higher (Hispanic, African Americans) or lower (Asian, Northern European) risks. \n\ntl;dr: High salt intake alone is just one of many risk factors for developing hypertension. ",
"It's also worth mentioning that the Japanese get more exercise and eat less calories so aren't as fat.\n\nAlso because, flatly, they evolved better hearts. Only people with a lower genetic predisposition to heart attack than the Japanese are the French."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
j2of7 | can someone explain to me how the us government works? | I'm British, so I can see the comparisons between the House of Lords/Commons and the congress/senate, but what role does the executive branch play? The president? State government? Can anyone give me a basic overview of the US government? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j2of7/can_someone_explain_to_me_how_the_us_government/ | {
"a_id": [
"c28n0ie",
"c28n0iq"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Unlike the UK, where the head of state is the Queen (or whomever may be the reigning monarch at any given time) and the head of government is the Prime Minister, the President of the United States is both head of state and head of government. The President is also commander-in-chief of the military.\n\nState governments operate essentially like the federal government does, only for that particular state. There's still a Legislative branch (Representatives/Senate*), Judicial branch, and Executive branch (instead of President, they're called Governor). Different states can have differing laws from one another, but federal law applies over all states and territories. For example, marijuana is illegal under federal law, but some states have laws that allow marijuana use for medicinal purposes.\n\n*Some states use different terms instead of Representative, such as Delegates and Assembly. Nebraska is the only state with a unicameral (and nonpartisan) legislative body, as opposed to bicameral in every other state.",
"I'll limit my explanation to the Federal government, but most state governments follow the same basic principles.\n\nThere are three branches of the government (which balance each other through a system of *checks and balances*) :\n\n**EXECUTIVE**\n\n* Simple Description: The President\n* How do I get in?: Nation-wide election every 4 years.\n* What do I do?: Act as the singular voice to represent all of America (Diplomacy, Military, etc.)\n* How do I balance the Legislative Branch?: I can veto bills that passed in congress, requiring a 2/3 majority in both houses for bills to pass.\n* How do I balance the Judicial Branch?: I nominate members of the Supreme Court.\n\n**LEGISLATIVE**\n\n* Simple Description: The Congress (consisting of the Senate and House of Representatives)\n* How do I get in?: Vote from your district (part of your state) (6 years for senators, 2 years for representatives)\n* What do I do?: Vote on new laws to govern the nation.\n* How do I balance the Executive Branch?: Can *impeach* (remove from office) the president.\n* How do I balance the Judicial Branch?: Have to accept nominations from the president.\n\n**JUDICIAL**\n\n* Simple Description: Supreme Court\n* How do I get in?: Get nominated by the president, and accepted by congress. I have no term limit.\n* What do I do?: Ensure that laws in the US do not violate the US Constitution.\n* How do I balance the Executive Branch?: Can rule any presidential act unconstitutional.\n* How do I balance the Judicial Branch?: Can rule any law passed by congress to be unconstitutional.\n\n\n**SOURCES**\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.socialstudieshelp.com/Lesson_13_Notes.htm"
]
] |
|
fo3zev | what is the military grade gps and why can't we receive its signals just like normal gps? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fo3zev/eli5_what_is_the_military_grade_gps_and_why_cant/ | {
"a_id": [
"flcz4a2"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"You are receiving the military signals. The US military disabled selective access in 2000, and ever since everyone on the planet has had the exact same GPS accuracy as the US military. Prior to 2000, the last few decimal points of the timecode were encrypted, so that only the US military could get full accuracy."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.